You should probably realize that the game in it's current state is pretty much on the easiest mode possible for testing purposes and will get significantly harder, making your ability/rune choices actually meaningful. It's a bit reckless to comment on the gameplay when it's obvious it's undertuned at the moment.
TL1 was a 1 week game at best. TL2 may be a 3 week game until mods come out.
Considering Torchlight cost like £15, I'd expect it to be a one week game.
Steampunk with a consistent art style, a design team that seems to know what it's doing and a decent developer that's pushing back release to flesh out the game? Shit, sounds like Blizzard before they got taken over by Activision.
Originally posted by Starpower
So basically
New = Bad
The same, but improved = Good
Gamers fear change
Intelligent new improvements = Good.
Random schizophrenic design choices for the sake of pushing the RMT store = Bad.
Originally posted by will75
I look foward to playing gw2, d3 seems to have a lot of people hating on it. Which means they have vested interest in POE and tl2. have you actually seen any videos of TL2? Really? You're looking foward to that?
I think d3 has massive potential and they will easily be the hottest selling game of 2012. Even if GW2 is as amazing as it seems, different genre. But d3 will stand alone, doesn't mean i'll be playing it all that much when gw2 launches, but it'll be a fun month or 2 until it does.
There has been so little seen and played with in beta, it's like saying you decided not to buy d2 because the demo runs of blood raven were boring and too easy.
LOL?
Torchlight 2 actually looks pretty good. It's not got the best graphics but it is, like Torchlight, a budget game with a consistent solid artstyle and fun-looking gameplay.
Except I didn't talk about it being too easy, at all.
Latency issues are the least of your concerns. For me, I have no seen any latency issues at all. Blizzard will iron out the problems, it's BETA.
That's nice. Especially considering the fact that latency issues aren't a matter of client and programming, but about placement of servers. So, if Blizzard hasn't secured the required servers now... Then I doubt they will.
Switching out abilities is really smart. Part of it has to do with allowing people alternate playstyles for any situation. Part of it has to do with balancing PvP. If you could swap everything out instantly, then combat would most likely turn into a bunch of scripting, button mashing garbage. Do remember that this is the first Diablo that is trying to produced a balanced PvP experience. You may approach every situation the same, but I don't.
Switching out abilities is really smart except you can't do it in combat without gimping yourself so it isn't smart? And there's no PvP in the game, so I have no idea what you're talking about.
Characters are very diverse. So I agree completely again. Also, we all know there will be an expansion with added characters to play. This is not everything.
wat
Healing orbs are meant to take the focus off of chugging potions at hyper speed. It's meant to put more focus on the combat itself and keep the flow of combat going without having to stop for town potion runs. It's a good change. I personally feel that the healing potion cooldown is too long, but that could be a quick change. BETA.
It doesn't work.
Graphically, the game is leaps and bounds above Diablo 2 and any other RPG hack and slash title in the past. That's also including the ones that will come out after it that all of the Diablo haters always have to mention in every Diablo post. Not just graphics either, I'm talking about UI, animations, as well as the feel of the world.
Hahahahahahahah.
Why even mention the controls? In fact, they are better than previous Diablo's. They've reduced the amount of clicking and button mashing with health globes and dragging between your targets with the holding of a mouse button. Everything seems less clunky, and much smoother.
Except just no.
This game is clearly still Diablo. The only things that I really don't like are the RMT auction system (Though it happens regardless) and the exclusion of gathering runes. But, at the same time.. one of my issues with the previous title was that it was too grindy. I did not find it fun to do 100 Bhaal runs every day to get some good gear. They have made a lot of changes to reduce the grind in that aspect.
Where's the Diablo in this game? The only connection to previous games is a very tenuous game background. New Tristram, Deckard Cain and... That's pretty much it so far.
I like the blacksmith and hopefully the Mystic will make a reappearance in the future. Those are interesting time sinks that were not present in previous titles. I like the ability to customize your spells and abilities, another feature that was absent in previous titles. I like how the game is displayed through AI and improved graphics. I like the physics that are a huge improvement over previous titles. They listened to the community and darkened the appearance of their game. I feel that Diablo 3 offers so much more positive than negative. None of the negatives are game-breakers in my opinion.
As soon as you start mentioning the physics, you've lost the argument.
In the end, you will be dead wrong. Diablo 3 is already going to be one of the best selling, if not THE best selling RPG this year. Torchlight and Path of Exile will be nothing but footnotes. You can fight it all you want, but in the end, it's inevitible.
You never know, you might be right. Blizzard might be able to get through to the CoD-tard generation and sell them this game. I hope every true hack'n'slash fan stays away, though, or they'll be very disappointed.
Graphically, the game is horrible. (...) You could say it has a certain style to it, if you thought style could mean "looks like it's from early 21st century".
You lost me here. The rest seemed legit, but seeing this part just invalidated all. Diablo 3 could be flagged as graphically "good", or for the hardest critics even "correct", but calling the screenshots all over the net to be "horrible", you just don't know what you're talking about.
All those kids looking for a fracking Renaissance painting in every new game are really starting to annoy me.
***** Before hitting that reply button, please READ the WHOLE thread you're about to post in *****
You lost me here. The rest seemed legit, but seeing this part just invalidated all. Diablo 3 could be flagged as graphically "good", or for the hardest critics even "correct", but calling the screenshots all over the net to be "horrible", you just don't know what you're talking about.
All those kids looking for a fracking Renaissance painting in every new game are really starting to annoy me.
Not really. Compare the models of characters to mobs to the environment. It's a mishmash. The environment is higher resolution than the mobs which, for whatever reason, look better than my character does. o.O
Yeah i'm sorry all Blizz fanboi's (Hell even I was at one point) but the OP nailed every single aspect about the game pretty dead-to-rights.
Okay sure, we all have different preferences but let's be realistic. I played Beta for quite awhile with every single class and honestly that was grinding my teeth at the 'uck' graphical design, "lolwut I don't even need to use pots anymore!?", and SERIOUSLY PEOPLE: ZERO CUSTOMIZATION with skills/attributes, practically anything. This game could be a total piece of garbage (which imo it is already) and i'd still play it if it at least kept something similiar or ... I daresay better, of choice of character progression. Where the hell is the fun of every single class being/playing the EXACT same. I mean hell, even WoW has different talent builds (even though they're very cookie-cutter these days, thanks to yours truely~ STREAMLINING) which allows for *some* differences between the same classes.
Anyway, really unless you've never played this kind of game before then i'd give it 6/10. (And that's being generous)
Sure it may be hard to live up to such a successful first two iterations of the franchise but it's not hard to tell when a particular game just simply doesn't live up to it's predecessor and as I stated above, I really did for the name-sake alone give D3 beta ALOT of gameplay hours to see if it felt better with time... Alas, it did not.
I'm sure some (maybe even alot) of things will be polished and improved upon by release, but unless some serious changes (Lol, I know right... This is blizzard we're talking about) happen, I don't think it'll be anything above 8/10 in any honest review. However, that being said i'm sure i'tll still sell out like hotcakes due to the number of people on the Blizz bandwagon alone.
Yeah i'm sorry all Blizz fanboi's (Hell even I was at one point) but the OP nailed every single aspect about the game pretty dead-to-rights.
Okay sure, we all have different preferences but let's be realistic. I played Beta for quite awhile with every single class and honestly that was grinding my teeth at the 'uck' graphical design, "lolwut I don't even need to use pots anymore!?", and SERIOUSLY PEOPLE: ZERO CUSTOMIZATION with skills/attributes, practically anything. This game could be a total piece of garbage (which imo it is already) and i'd still play it if it at least kept something similiar or ... I daresay better, of choice of character progression. Where the hell is the fun of every single class being/playing the EXACT same. I mean hell, even WoW has different talent builds (even though they're very cookie-cutter these days, thanks to yours truely~ STREAMLINING) which allows for *some* differences between the same classes.
Anyway, really unless you've never played this kind of game before then i'd give it 6/10. (And that's being generous)
Sure it may be hard to live up to such a successful first two iterations of the franchise but it's not hard to tell when a particular game just simply doesn't live up to it's predecessor and as I stated above, I really did for the name-sake alone give D3 beta ALOT of gameplay hours to see if it felt better with time... Alas, it did not.
I'm sure some (maybe even alot) of things will be polished and improved upon by release, but unless some serious changes (Lol, I know right... This is blizzard we're talking about) happen, I don't think it'll be anything above 8/10 in any honest review. However, that being said i'm sure i'tll still sell out like hotcakes due to the number of people on the Blizz bandwagon alone.
OH and... "Enemy voice acting" Really? Lol.
Again, the beta is set on the easiet mode for testing purposes. Go into Hell or Inferno and you won't just hack and slash away and will require some actual strategy to what you're doing. You abilities and runes will matter, your health potions will matter, and yes even health orbs that drop will matter. Stop trying to criticize the gameplay when it's obviously effected by the difficulty level of the beta being set to so low for testing purposes.
It's so painfully obvious that the beta is setup to be easy for testing purposes that I don't understand how you can misinterpret that.
Graphically, the game is horrible. (...) You could say it has a certain style to it, if you thought style could mean "looks like it's from early 21st century".
You lost me here. The rest seemed legit, but seeing this part just invalidated all. Diablo 3 could be flagged as graphically "good", or for the hardest critics even "correct", but calling the screenshots all over the net to be "horrible", you just don't know what you're talking about.
All those kids looking for a fracking Renaissance painting in every new game are really starting to annoy me.
I wouldn't call the graphics horrible but I also wouldn't call them good. I don't even think they are decent for a 2012 AAA game. Even some indy games look better, check out Trine 2 for example.
Especially the characters and creatures stand out to me, I think they don't look "solid" enough, colours are to bland and they also are a bit low res it seems. Hard to explain. Compare it to Trine 2 or Bastion (another indy game) and you might know what I mean.
Edit.
I even think Guild Wars 2 has better character/creature graphics and that's a mmo!
Blizzard as of the last years did just one thing try to amass alot of money with the brainless fans of it, WoW got worse and worse over the years, and Diablo 3 for the time it took them to make, should be alot but alot better, but as the last post said people love to be riped off just because it has a name on it, its like buying some bag of channel for 5000 dollars just because it has channel writen on it, its the same thing.
Get some brains people, i knew this game would be shit from day one, like starcraft 2 was and like wow is beginning to be.
Just stop giving money to blizzard they may still be able to come back again as the good company that they once were.
Man the second I read that you couldn't distribute your own stat and skill points I said "WTF is this shit?" Then I saw the graphics and was basically done being interested in D3.
Honestly, one of the worst things an RPG can do is take itself too seriously with worries about what players will do to themselves with character progression. You know what happened when people gimped themselves while playing D2? They rerolled or GTFO'd. The world might end if Blizzard let you make a sorc that could use heavy armor or barb that used a bow in D3.
(Disclaimer: Don't know what Path of Exile is. Torchlight was too boring for me to ever finish)
"I will not play it nor any other MMO until they make it possible to obtain the best gear without forcing people to group up to do so." SwampRob
Just a little info of the day torchlight is headed by the orginal guys from the original diablo games matter fact they were in the process of making diablo 3 but because it didnt meet the expectations of vivendi they were let go where they ran off and created flagship games then they got canned because main guy left or something like that now they started up on runic games.
Blizzard is one of the largest and richest game companies in the world.
Battle net shows three VERY big screens for everything that the inudstry market leader is currently doing. These screens are for three games only: SC2, WOW and D3. All they do currently...is these three things.
I know about the Blizzard North drama and I heard all the negative comments and beta reviews. Let me tell you what I think is going to happen: D3 will sell MILLIONS of copies, will gain a large user base that will give the game a LOT of traction and it will probably develop into awesome never ending hack and slash PVE coupled with a competitive PVP esport. For millions of people. You heard me right. I see D3 game environmnent as the perfect place for PVP, much better than in a MMO setting where you have to balance tons of multiplayer PVE (sorry GW2).
I don't see how D3 is going to be in any way worse than anything out there in the same genre, much less POE and T2 and whatever else you try to convince me. Even if it ships in sucky state, which it won't, Blizz can just throw so many resources behind the game that they can make something awesome out it. Just because they can. Blizz can even buy whoever makes POE and Torchlight and put them to work for them if they want to.
D3 has the perfect setup for competitive esports PVP. I don't care about MMO worlds, stupid quest grinding, Azeroth, Middle Earth, Hyboria (I do care about New Eden though). All I want is to level my character in a fun fast paced hack and slash solo PVE experience that I can play at my own pace and without being bothered by multi user crap and at the end I want to get thrown into a PVP arena to fight other people.
World PVP=GW2. But it will still be worse than EVE...
Arenas and instanced PVP=D3. Not because D3 PVP will be better than GW2 PVP, but because D3 will attract so many more players that it will just obliterate competition.
This is really a prime example that shows sometimes endless money does Not equal quality. I honestly would have been happy if they took all the classes from Diablo 2. updated the graphics and set it in a new world.
This is what makes me sad about games as I get older. Like Square and FF, it's good business to sell the same content over and over again, but it's not particlarly good for the game industry though.
I get that SC2 was successful, but it was really a regression of the RTS genre. It may have been fun for many, but to me, it was essentially the same game mechanics from 15 years ago. In terms of D3 ... it looks like D2 to me and that's not good.
Incremental changes would have been fin if D3 was released 1-2 years after D2, but this is 10+ years later. I can't speak for others, but I personally expect more, especially from a company with the resources to build better games. To me, blizzard is too concerned with the business aspects (i.e. maintaining margins) rather than building great games and it's unfortunately been like that for more than a few years now.
Stopped reading right there. Go troll somewhere else.
DERP.
Why is it that whenever someone says something CONSTRUCTIVELY negative about a game, double digit IQ fanbois like this come out of the wordwork? Ooooh, someone said something bad about your precious ****ing game, boo hoo, get over it.
Back on topic: I was afraid that Blizzard would dumb down Diablo, given that this is kind of the trend with games lately. Yes, I know they're changing the formula, but change does not have to translate to "Stripping out everything you loved about the previous games and taking away choices so we can appeal to the CoD generation." Making a game accessable does not mean you have to dumb it down, it's called an in-depth manual and a well written tutorial.
Looks like D3 is going to be a pass for me, I think I'll save my cash for Dark Souls.
This is really a prime example that shows sometimes endless money does Not equal quality. I honestly would have been happy if they took all the classes from Diablo 2. updated the graphics and set it in a new world.
This is what makes me sad about games as I get older. Like Square and FF, it's good business to sell the same content over and over again, but it's not particlarly good for the game industry though.
I get that SC2 was successful, but it was really a regression of the RTS genre. It may have been fun for many, but to me, it was essentially the same game mechanics from 15 years ago. In terms of D3 ... it looks like D2 to me and that's not good.
Incremental changes would have been fin if D3 was released 1-2 years after D2, but this is 10+ years later. I can't speak for others, but I personally expect more, especially from a company with the resources to build better games. To me, blizzard is too concerned with the business aspects (i.e. maintaining margins) rather than building great games and it's unfortunately been like that for more than a few years now.
SC2 a regression of the RTS Genre? What are you talking about? Sure it doesn't change the game machanices of easily the most susseciful RTS ever, but did you really expect them to make SC2 more like a unsesseciful RTS in the "huge" RTS market that is out there? Of course not, SC2 did what they wanted it's just different enough from SC to be it's own game without turning away huge sections of their fan base.
I expect the same from Diablo 3, a sightly improved verison of D2. Side not like other top-down action RPGs have really adanced the genre. Torchlight was basicly Diablo 2 with guns and pets.
That being said I am a bit worried about the skill system action RPGs are all about building your character with loot and skill points. If that anit there...
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
Just a little info of the day torchlight is headed by the orginal guys from the original diablo games matter fact they were in the process of making diablo 3 but because it didnt meet the expectations of vivendi they were let go where they ran off and created flagship games then they got canned because main guy left or something like that now they started up on runic games.
Just a little info of the day torchlight is headed by the orginal guys from the original diablo games matter fact they were in the process of making diablo 3 but because it didnt meet the expectations of vivendi they were let go where they ran off and created flagship games then they got canned because main guy left or something like that now they started up on runic games.
Article and couple of Screenshots of what could be Diablo 3 by, today's Runic games...
Ouch that's horrible.
Based on what the original Diablo developers have done since leaving Blizzard, I'm not so sure they were responsible for the polish and final product we ended up with in Diablo and D2.
Just a little info of the day torchlight is headed by the orginal guys from the original diablo games matter fact they were in the process of making diablo 3 but because it didnt meet the expectations of vivendi they were let go where they ran off and created flagship games then they got canned because main guy left or something like that now they started up on runic games.
Article and couple of Screenshots of what could be Diablo 3 by, today's Runic games...
well i'm glad thats not the diablo III we're getting.. i'm no overly excited for it and if GW2 launches soon after i'll be playing that over D3 but i dont agree that barbarians and monks kill things faster then other classes... like i've had diablo III beta for almost a year now and i've taken each class upto level 13 or something in the past and by far, the fastest to level / kill things with was the wizard... the amount of AoE and damage that class pumps out against mobs is undeniably insane...
Again, the beta is set on the easiet mode for testing purposes. Go into Hell or Inferno and you won't just hack and slash away and will require some actual strategy to what you're doing. You abilities and runes will matter, your health potions will matter, and yes even health orbs that drop will matter. Stop trying to criticize the gameplay when it's obviously effected by the difficulty level of the beta being set to so low for testing purposes.
It's so painfully obvious that the beta is setup to be easy for testing purposes that I don't understand how you can misinterpret that.
You do realise that that's not what we're talking about at all, right?
All I can say really is what do you expect? Due to consoles games have been going down the tubes, devs are getting lazy lately and just don't seem to make decent games anymore. Look at Mass Effect 1, then compare it to 2 and 3 for example, eachone is even more simplified than the last. Once Blizz announced diablo 3 will be coming out for consoles I knew right then and there the game was gonna be crap due to the devs over simplifiying it for the cattle that are casual gamers. I usually pirate a game on pc before i'll buy it to try it out, but I haven't found a pc game that was by a known devoloper for years that'd I'd consider buying, though I have bought some indie titles. I guess I was right about D3 probally going to suck, oh well, i'll torrent it when it comes out, Kinda sad really, alot of fans fo diablo are going to be really dissapointed, me included. The fact there is no skill builds almost was a major hint that the game was gonna be fail-tier.
WTB: the years back when games and mmo's were actually good. (whichw as like 2000 ish before wow). I want my decent games back kthx
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
You didn't read what the OP posted whatsoever did you?
He never said anything about it being New making it bad.
He pointed out MULTIPLE issues that showed the game is not only NOT improved, but a backwards version & dumbed down Diablo 2. In other words, WORSE....not improved.
Gamers don't fear change. They fear companies with too much money with no direction trying to create an entirely different game from its predecessor that was one of the best dungeon crawlers EVER. All they had to do was improved upon Diablo 2 for Diablo 3. They, instead, decided to dumb the product down and make it worse.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity: Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
Stopped reading right there. Go troll somewhere else.
DERP.
Why is it that whenever someone says something CONSTRUCTIVELY negative about a game, double digit IQ fanbois like this come out of the wordwork? Ooooh, someone said something bad about your precious ****ing game, boo hoo, get over it.
Back on topic: I was afraid that Blizzard would dumb down Diablo, given that this is kind of the trend with games lately. Yes, I know they're changing the formula, but change does not have to translate to "Stripping out everything you loved about the previous games and taking away choices so we can appeal to the CoD generation." Making a game accessable does not mean you have to dumb it down, it's called an in-depth manual and a well written tutorial.
Looks like D3 is going to be a pass for me, I think I'll save my cash for Dark Souls.
Oh ya, I hate those whiners, don't you, always whining incesintly to no end. If only they could just rise above all of the cynicism and act like they don't have a stick wedge up their butt! /scarcasm off
Again, the beta is set on the easiet mode for testing purposes. Go into Hell or Inferno and you won't just hack and slash away and will require some actual strategy to what you're doing. You abilities and runes will matter, your health potions will matter, and yes even health orbs that drop will matter. Stop trying to criticize the gameplay when it's obviously effected by the difficulty level of the beta being set to so low for testing purposes.
It's so painfully obvious that the beta is setup to be easy for testing purposes that I don't understand how you can misinterpret that.
You do realise that that's not what we're talking about at all, right?
...Right?
One of yours and his primary complaints is the lack of customization as well as the dumbed down gameplay. Neither of which you can seriously criticize when you're in beta that no only has the game set to it's easiest level but also limits you to level 13. Therefor gameplay complaints as far as depth, customization and difficulty (which is half of what your originally post is about) are all negated by this because you have no real experience in how those aspects of the game will really be.
You yourself compared the gameplay to CoD levels, when it's hardly comparable to that at all when you look at the game as a whole. I mean even going to such lengths as criticizing the healing options on the easiest level is exactly what I mean. Yes the first 13 levels on easy mode may be equivalent, but that's not the entirity of the game, nor should it be criticized as though it is.
Comments
You should probably realize that the game in it's current state is pretty much on the easiest mode possible for testing purposes and will get significantly harder, making your ability/rune choices actually meaningful. It's a bit reckless to comment on the gameplay when it's obvious it's undertuned at the moment.
Considering Torchlight cost like £15, I'd expect it to be a one week game.
Steampunk with a consistent art style, a design team that seems to know what it's doing and a decent developer that's pushing back release to flesh out the game? Shit, sounds like Blizzard before they got taken over by Activision.
Intelligent new improvements = Good.
Random schizophrenic design choices for the sake of pushing the RMT store = Bad.
Torchlight 2 actually looks pretty good. It's not got the best graphics but it is, like Torchlight, a budget game with a consistent solid artstyle and fun-looking gameplay.
Except I didn't talk about it being too easy, at all.
Add me on Steam!
Me and a Friend are Bad At Games
You lost me here. The rest seemed legit, but seeing this part just invalidated all. Diablo 3 could be flagged as graphically "good", or for the hardest critics even "correct", but calling the screenshots all over the net to be "horrible", you just don't know what you're talking about.
All those kids looking for a fracking Renaissance painting in every new game are really starting to annoy me.
***** Before hitting that reply button, please READ the WHOLE thread you're about to post in *****
I prefer Torchlight over Diablo.
Not really. Compare the models of characters to mobs to the environment. It's a mishmash. The environment is higher resolution than the mobs which, for whatever reason, look better than my character does. o.O
Add me on Steam!
Me and a Friend are Bad At Games
Yeah i'm sorry all Blizz fanboi's (Hell even I was at one point) but the OP nailed every single aspect about the game pretty dead-to-rights.
Okay sure, we all have different preferences but let's be realistic. I played Beta for quite awhile with every single class and honestly that was grinding my teeth at the 'uck' graphical design, "lolwut I don't even need to use pots anymore!?", and SERIOUSLY PEOPLE: ZERO CUSTOMIZATION with skills/attributes, practically anything. This game could be a total piece of garbage (which imo it is already) and i'd still play it if it at least kept something similiar or ... I daresay better, of choice of character progression. Where the hell is the fun of every single class being/playing the EXACT same. I mean hell, even WoW has different talent builds (even though they're very cookie-cutter these days, thanks to yours truely~ STREAMLINING) which allows for *some* differences between the same classes.
Anyway, really unless you've never played this kind of game before then i'd give it 6/10. (And that's being generous)
Sure it may be hard to live up to such a successful first two iterations of the franchise but it's not hard to tell when a particular game just simply doesn't live up to it's predecessor and as I stated above, I really did for the name-sake alone give D3 beta ALOT of gameplay hours to see if it felt better with time... Alas, it did not.
I'm sure some (maybe even alot) of things will be polished and improved upon by release, but unless some serious changes (Lol, I know right... This is blizzard we're talking about) happen, I don't think it'll be anything above 8/10 in any honest review. However, that being said i'm sure i'tll still sell out like hotcakes due to the number of people on the Blizz bandwagon alone.
OH and... "Enemy voice acting" Really? Lol.
Again, the beta is set on the easiet mode for testing purposes. Go into Hell or Inferno and you won't just hack and slash away and will require some actual strategy to what you're doing. You abilities and runes will matter, your health potions will matter, and yes even health orbs that drop will matter. Stop trying to criticize the gameplay when it's obviously effected by the difficulty level of the beta being set to so low for testing purposes.
It's so painfully obvious that the beta is setup to be easy for testing purposes that I don't understand how you can misinterpret that.
I wouldn't call the graphics horrible but I also wouldn't call them good. I don't even think they are decent for a 2012 AAA game. Even some indy games look better, check out Trine 2 for example.
Especially the characters and creatures stand out to me, I think they don't look "solid" enough, colours are to bland and they also are a bit low res it seems. Hard to explain. Compare it to Trine 2 or Bastion (another indy game) and you might know what I mean.
Edit.
I even think Guild Wars 2 has better character/creature graphics and that's a mmo!
Blizzard as of the last years did just one thing try to amass alot of money with the brainless fans of it, WoW got worse and worse over the years, and Diablo 3 for the time it took them to make, should be alot but alot better, but as the last post said people love to be riped off just because it has a name on it, its like buying some bag of channel for 5000 dollars just because it has channel writen on it, its the same thing.
Get some brains people, i knew this game would be shit from day one, like starcraft 2 was and like wow is beginning to be.
Just stop giving money to blizzard they may still be able to come back again as the good company that they once were.
Man the second I read that you couldn't distribute your own stat and skill points I said "WTF is this shit?" Then I saw the graphics and was basically done being interested in D3.
Honestly, one of the worst things an RPG can do is take itself too seriously with worries about what players will do to themselves with character progression. You know what happened when people gimped themselves while playing D2? They rerolled or GTFO'd. The world might end if Blizzard let you make a sorc that could use heavy armor or barb that used a bow in D3.
(Disclaimer: Don't know what Path of Exile is. Torchlight was too boring for me to ever finish)
"I will not play it nor any other MMO until they make it possible to obtain the best gear without forcing people to group up to do so." SwampRob
I've signed on for the Path of Exile beta like two months ago,never got a reply.
still will check out when it comes out,looks very good indeed.
Just a little info of the day torchlight is headed by the orginal guys from the original diablo games matter fact they were in the process of making diablo 3 but because it didnt meet the expectations of vivendi they were let go where they ran off and created flagship games then they got canned because main guy left or something like that now they started up on runic games.
Blizzard is one of the largest and richest game companies in the world.
Battle net shows three VERY big screens for everything that the inudstry market leader is currently doing. These screens are for three games only: SC2, WOW and D3. All they do currently...is these three things.
I know about the Blizzard North drama and I heard all the negative comments and beta reviews. Let me tell you what I think is going to happen: D3 will sell MILLIONS of copies, will gain a large user base that will give the game a LOT of traction and it will probably develop into awesome never ending hack and slash PVE coupled with a competitive PVP esport. For millions of people. You heard me right. I see D3 game environmnent as the perfect place for PVP, much better than in a MMO setting where you have to balance tons of multiplayer PVE (sorry GW2).
I don't see how D3 is going to be in any way worse than anything out there in the same genre, much less POE and T2 and whatever else you try to convince me. Even if it ships in sucky state, which it won't, Blizz can just throw so many resources behind the game that they can make something awesome out it. Just because they can. Blizz can even buy whoever makes POE and Torchlight and put them to work for them if they want to.
D3 has the perfect setup for competitive esports PVP. I don't care about MMO worlds, stupid quest grinding, Azeroth, Middle Earth, Hyboria (I do care about New Eden though). All I want is to level my character in a fun fast paced hack and slash solo PVE experience that I can play at my own pace and without being bothered by multi user crap and at the end I want to get thrown into a PVP arena to fight other people.
World PVP=GW2. But it will still be worse than EVE...
Arenas and instanced PVP=D3. Not because D3 PVP will be better than GW2 PVP, but because D3 will attract so many more players that it will just obliterate competition.
This is what makes me sad about games as I get older. Like Square and FF, it's good business to sell the same content over and over again, but it's not particlarly good for the game industry though.
I get that SC2 was successful, but it was really a regression of the RTS genre. It may have been fun for many, but to me, it was essentially the same game mechanics from 15 years ago. In terms of D3 ... it looks like D2 to me and that's not good.
Incremental changes would have been fin if D3 was released 1-2 years after D2, but this is 10+ years later. I can't speak for others, but I personally expect more, especially from a company with the resources to build better games. To me, blizzard is too concerned with the business aspects (i.e. maintaining margins) rather than building great games and it's unfortunately been like that for more than a few years now.
If you don't worry about it, it's not a problem.
DERP.
Why is it that whenever someone says something CONSTRUCTIVELY negative about a game, double digit IQ fanbois like this come out of the wordwork? Ooooh, someone said something bad about your precious ****ing game, boo hoo, get over it.
Back on topic: I was afraid that Blizzard would dumb down Diablo, given that this is kind of the trend with games lately. Yes, I know they're changing the formula, but change does not have to translate to "Stripping out everything you loved about the previous games and taking away choices so we can appeal to the CoD generation." Making a game accessable does not mean you have to dumb it down, it's called an in-depth manual and a well written tutorial.
Looks like D3 is going to be a pass for me, I think I'll save my cash for Dark Souls.
SC2 a regression of the RTS Genre? What are you talking about? Sure it doesn't change the game machanices of easily the most susseciful RTS ever, but did you really expect them to make SC2 more like a unsesseciful RTS in the "huge" RTS market that is out there? Of course not, SC2 did what they wanted it's just different enough from SC to be it's own game without turning away huge sections of their fan base.
I expect the same from Diablo 3, a sightly improved verison of D2. Side not like other top-down action RPGs have really adanced the genre. Torchlight was basicly Diablo 2 with guns and pets.
That being said I am a bit worried about the skill system action RPGs are all about building your character with loot and skill points. If that anit there...
I will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. A dev job should be to make the game better not make me pay so it sucks less.
Just reminded me on this article
http://kotaku.com/5761172/this-is-what-diablo-iii-looked-like-a-long-time-ago/gallery/1
Article and couple of Screenshots of what could be Diablo 3 by, today's Runic games...
Main MMO at the moment: Guild Wars 2
Waiting for: Pathfinder Online
Whatever floats YOUR boat bud.
Ouch that's horrible.
Based on what the original Diablo developers have done since leaving Blizzard, I'm not so sure they were responsible for the polish and final product we ended up with in Diablo and D2.
well i'm glad thats not the diablo III we're getting.. i'm no overly excited for it and if GW2 launches soon after i'll be playing that over D3 but i dont agree that barbarians and monks kill things faster then other classes... like i've had diablo III beta for almost a year now and i've taken each class upto level 13 or something in the past and by far, the fastest to level / kill things with was the wizard... the amount of AoE and damage that class pumps out against mobs is undeniably insane...
You do realise that that's not what we're talking about at all, right?
...Right?
Add me on Steam!
Me and a Friend are Bad At Games
All I can say really is what do you expect? Due to consoles games have been going down the tubes, devs are getting lazy lately and just don't seem to make decent games anymore. Look at Mass Effect 1, then compare it to 2 and 3 for example, eachone is even more simplified than the last. Once Blizz announced diablo 3 will be coming out for consoles I knew right then and there the game was gonna be crap due to the devs over simplifiying it for the cattle that are casual gamers. I usually pirate a game on pc before i'll buy it to try it out, but I haven't found a pc game that was by a known devoloper for years that'd I'd consider buying, though I have bought some indie titles. I guess I was right about D3 probally going to suck, oh well, i'll torrent it when it comes out, Kinda sad really, alot of fans fo diablo are going to be really dissapointed, me included. The fact there is no skill builds almost was a major hint that the game was gonna be fail-tier.
WTB: the years back when games and mmo's were actually good. (whichw as like 2000 ish before wow). I want my decent games back kthx
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
You didn't read what the OP posted whatsoever did you?
He never said anything about it being New making it bad.
He pointed out MULTIPLE issues that showed the game is not only NOT improved, but a backwards version & dumbed down Diablo 2. In other words, WORSE....not improved.
Gamers don't fear change. They fear companies with too much money with no direction trying to create an entirely different game from its predecessor that was one of the best dungeon crawlers EVER. All they had to do was improved upon Diablo 2 for Diablo 3. They, instead, decided to dumb the product down and make it worse.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
Oh ya, I hate those whiners, don't you, always whining incesintly to no end. If only they could just rise above all of the cynicism and act like they don't have a stick wedge up their butt! /scarcasm off
One of yours and his primary complaints is the lack of customization as well as the dumbed down gameplay. Neither of which you can seriously criticize when you're in beta that no only has the game set to it's easiest level but also limits you to level 13. Therefor gameplay complaints as far as depth, customization and difficulty (which is half of what your originally post is about) are all negated by this because you have no real experience in how those aspects of the game will really be.
You yourself compared the gameplay to CoD levels, when it's hardly comparable to that at all when you look at the game as a whole. I mean even going to such lengths as criticizing the healing options on the easiest level is exactly what I mean. Yes the first 13 levels on easy mode may be equivalent, but that's not the entirity of the game, nor should it be criticized as though it is.