I've already recieved more out of my beta weekend for my pre-purchase then I recieved from the steaming pile of crap that is d3.
D3 was the most dissapointing game of this decade for me. Guild Wars 2 would be hard pressed to meet that distinction. Plus you have a company that is more customer friendly behind it. Blizzard is notorious for milking shipped content until the very last second, then releasing addons.
As if u thought Blizzard was going to serve you something creative, or better than before. They have been punch drunk on cash for so long, they haven't leaned the hard lessons SOE has.
Sad... really.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
D3 was totally worth 60 bucks. Best game ever? No but considering 60 bucks is the average price every single game is released at it was way better then a ton of games in that price range. GW2 I think will totally be worth 60 bucks. But then again I thought SWTOR was very much worth 60 bucks as well, not as a MMO but within one month I ran through the very well written class story line to level 50 had a blast with pre 50 warzones and think I got my 60 bucks worth. And I think GW2 will most likely keep me hooked at least as long as SWTOR did so 60 bucks well spent. Like someone was saying I will get more enjoyment out of a game like GW2 then a night at the bar or going to a baseball game or even by the time you go to a movie and by popcorn and a drink your almost up to 60 bucks these days it seems.
As if u thought Blizzard was going to serve you something creative, or better than before. They have been punch drunk on cash for so long, they haven't leaned the hard lessons SOE has.
Sad... really.
80 hours and counting... great h&s, fun game. Worth every penny.
As if u thought Blizzard was going to serve you something creative, or better than before. They have been punch drunk on cash for so long, they haven't leaned the hard lessons SOE has.
Sad... really.
I'm confused by the sound of your post you have not bought Diablo 3 or played through it so how can you be so certain it was not worth the cash for it? I don't think it's really fair to review a game you haven't played based on issues and things you have read about in posts and what maybe watched some youtube videos of it. That is like watching a movie trailer and talking to a friend that had seen it and then saying you didn't like it.
I really don't know what you're trying to achieve by starting a flame-inducing thread? You realize there may be people on here who like DIII?
So I thought DIII was worth $60 and you think it wasn't but you're asking me if I think another game is worth if while I thought the first game was worth it? What sense does that make?
Originally posted by BizkitNL
Who made you authority when it comes to gaming enjoyment? Add to that the total lack of respect you have for other people's tastes. Makes me sick.
This.
Originally posted by orgash
Going by your title....umm TONS of people believe D3 is worth $60 so really what does it matter what people think about GW2?
You kinda just sound like you wanted to bash Diablo 3 rather than find out what GW2 is worth....but Guildwars 2 worth $60? that is easy : YES---I---NO (pick either side depending on what you think of it after buying/wasting money on it)
D3 might have its shortcomings but all the negative ratings on Metacritic are hardly deserved. I get the feeling that people who are disappointed with D3 either have never played D2 or completely forgot what it was. It seems they expected a MMO but D3 isn't exactly a MMO, it's an Action-RPG game.
Online-only DRM (which is about the only valid point) aside your average negative "review" of D3 boils down to:
1) 10 years old graphics, cartoonish look. (I'm sorry, but vanilla NWN is exactly 10 years old. One screenshow would be enough to see the difference. D3 isn't cutting-edge if you compare to Crysis 2 with DX11 and high-res texture pack but for a DX9 game it has decent graphics. And re. art... ever played Torchlight or WoW? Now that's cartoonish. D3 isn't cartoonish at all..)
2) Repetitive, less character customization. (Seriously, try playing D2. Say, a typical Blizzard/Meteor sorc would alternate between these two skills and that's *all*. Ah yeah, once in a while you renew buffs or use teleport to get somewhere faster. Tons of variety and tactical choices, right. And yes. there was only one viable way to spend stat points: just enough in str/dex to wear you endgame gear, rest in vit.)
3) Poor storyline. (I've seen worse, much worse. Besides, was it any better in D2? In D2/LoD nobody even bothered to explain anything. What was Andariel doing in the Monastery? What was Duriel doing in Tal Rasha's tomb? What did Baal do while his brothers were being killed? And that's main story. Side quests - forget about any explanation at all.)
4) Normal is too easy. (Try inferno. 'nuff sad. )
---
Long story short people hate D3 for being a Diablo series game.
MMORPG genre is dead. Long live MMOCS (Massively Multiplayer Online Cash Shop).
D3 might have its shortcomings but all the negative ratings on Metacritic are hardly deserved. I get the feeling that people who are disappointed with D3 either have never played D2 or completely forgot what it was. It seems they expected a MMO but D3 isn't exactly a MMO, it's an Action-RPG game.
Online-only DRM (which is about the only valid point) aside your average negative "review" of D3 boils down to:
1) 10 years old graphics, cartoonish look. (I'm sorry, but vanilla NWN is exactly 10 years old. One screenshow would be enough to see the difference. D3 isn't cutting-edge if you compare to Crysis 2 with DX11 and high-res texture pack but for a DX9 game it has decent graphics. And re. art... ever played Torchlight or WoW? Now that's cartoonish. D3 isn't cartoonish at all..)
2) Repetitive, less character customization. (Seriously, try playing D2. Say, a typical Blizzard/Meteor sorc would alternate between these two skills and that's *all*. Ah yeah, once in a while you renew buffs or use teleport to get somewhere faster. Tons of variety and tactical choices, right. And yes. there was only one viable way to spend stat points: just enough in str/dex to wear you endgame gear, rest in vit.)
3) Poor storyline. (I've seen worse, much worse. Besides, was it any better in D2? In D2/LoD nobody even bothered to explain anything. What was Andariel doing in the Monastery? What was Duriel doing in Tal Rasha's tomb? What did Baal do while his brothers were being killed? And that's main story. Side quests - forget about any explanation at all.)
4) Normal is too easy. (Try inferno. 'nuff sad. )
---
Long story short people hate D3 for being a Diablo series game.
I agree completely with your post. I thought it had a very solid(not the best but very solid) storyline especially compared to alot of storylines these days. Only thing I did not like was they did not wrap things up very well in the end there are a lot of side story things and people that were building that kind of never got resolved or you kind of were left with the feeling of "what happened to them/here" But that could just be a open door for addon content and not truly lazy unfinished story telling.
D3 might have its shortcomings but all the negative ratings on Metacritic are hardly deserved. I get the feeling that people who are disappointed with D3 either have never played D2 or completely forgot what it was. It seems they expected a MMO but D3 isn't exactly a MMO, it's an Action-RPG game.
I think DIII got a backlash due to it's mere overall popularity. Blizzard had some of the most difficult launches because of simply how many people tried to log into that poor game. Then, with more people, you get more disagreements. A lot of people have really weird expectations considering this is a 10 year sequel and we know how that goes. Also a lot of people played too many MMO's and treat DIII like one (all the talk about endgame, progression, wtf?). Then complain they "finished" the game and have nothing to do (???). Some are actually DII vets who were attracted to DII's drawbacks (rushing, boss runs, FFA loot), while they really should be playing PoE. A lot of complaints are very, very strange. I found very little logic in most of DIII's reviews. Seriously how many more times are people going to bring up attribute points?
I had some disappointments with DIII myself. It could have been a better game. It's still the best Hack&Slash released since Diablo II / Nox, though, and it's definitely worth $60 far more than most games on the market...
I think the game is worth the price; just be sure your PC has a decent video card; I got a 10% discount when I bought it online. Best thing is all the stuff the devs said the game will have are in-game. Hopefully nothing is removed by launch.
So a poster makes a thread with D3 in the title saying he personally doesn't think D3 is worth 60$ and suddenly a discussion starts wether D3 is worth it or not.... this thread should've been locked a long time ago since the answer is obvious (to the poster not to the discussion about D3 :P) and was given at the very first page
Block the trolls, don't answer them, so we can remove the garbage from these forums
So a poster makes a thread with D3 in the title saying he personally doesn't think D3 is worth 60$ and suddenly a discussion starts wether D3 is worth it or not....
Yes. This is why you do not start threads with inflammatory titles.
That wasn't a personal opinion there. He's stating it as a fact. Besides, the whole idea of the thread is kinda useless. People on a GW2 forums obviously are not gonna think GW2 is worth paying for. /sarcasm
Hold off buying GW2 until there is a solid release date. We are far from release and don't know what changes they are going to make to the game. Many games are not as good at launch as the betas.
I would say I might have gotten enough gameplay hours in D3 to say it was worth it but the game needs a lot of work.
GW2 is probably worth its price tag as well. However, release is probably still rather far away (several months I guess) and one BWE per month just isn't enough. In fact, I absolutely don't get why ANet doesn't run a continuous closed beta. After all, almost all "testers" have pre-purchased the game. Why can't they just play beta when they want to?
MMORPG genre is dead. Long live MMOCS (Massively Multiplayer Online Cash Shop).
Hold off buying GW2 until there is a solid release date. We are far from release and don't know what changes they are going to make to the game. Many games are not as good at launch as the betas.
I would say I might have gotten enough gameplay hours in D3 to say it was worth it but the game needs a lot of work.
Yes it is well known the devs work for years to have most of the content changed prior to launch! Sorry, this is ArenaNet who has a solid reputation. What are they going to change that would make it worth less than $60? I have already gotten almost $60 worth of enjoyment just from the BWE and I have only opened 2% of the world with one toon. I'm not trying to being rude but that makes no sense.
edit: changed
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
I think Guild Wars 2 is one of the best values in gaming, period. Where else can you get this many hours of enjoyment, of content, of polish, of replayability for $60?
I’ll give a direct comparison. Guild Wars 2 is both a great MMO and a great RPG, so anyone who plays offline RPGs like Skyrim or online RPGs like Diablo III is going to love Guild Wars 2. Those games cost $60. Compared to them, Guild Wars 2 has at least as much content, world exploration, personal storylines, and replayability. And then for no additional charge, Guild Wars 2 gives you a fully persistent world where you can hang out with your friends online, lots of social features, a live team dedicated to introducing lots of new content into the game, and two integrated forms of [player-versus-player].
I’ll give a direct comparison. Guild Wars 2 is both a great MMO and a great RPG, so anyone who plays offline RPGs like Skyrim or online RPGs like Diablo III is going to love Guild Wars 2. Those games cost $60. Compared to them, Guild Wars 2 has at least as much content, world exploration, personal storylines, and replayability.
Eh. I wonder if I'll be able to get my dad into this. He loves the TES series, but I think GW2 will still be too weird for him.
I definitely think GW2 will be worth the $120 I paid for two copies. Judging solely on my own experience in the BWE, it would be worth the money if released right now. However, I'd probably think differently if I had been one of the unlucky ones to have run into the issues I've heard about. I didn't have those issues, though.
As for D3, I know a lot of people think that game is worth the $60 for it. I didn't buy it as I'm not the biggest Diablo fan (although D2 was fun) but many, many people are still getting their money's worth on that game so it can't be that bad. Yeah, some people have gripes about it, but isn't that every $60 game? I've never seen or heard of a game that didn't have its detractors.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
So a poster makes a thread with D3 in the title saying he personally doesn't think D3 is worth 60$ and suddenly a discussion starts wether D3 is worth it or not....
Yes. This is why you do not start threads with inflammatory titles.
That wasn't a personal opinion there. He's stating it as a fact. Besides, the whole idea of the thread is kinda useless. People on a GW2 forums obviously are not gonna think GW2 is worth paying for. /sarcasm
Troll thread if I ever saw one.
The thread was actually fine until page 6. I think most of us understood that the OP personally felt D3 wasn't worth the $60 and was wondering what re-assurances their might be that he won't feel the same way if he buys GW2. Whether or not D3 is worth $60 is subjective and most people in the thread didn't even touch the arguement, because it just wasn't relavent. As far as inflamatory thread titles, hasn't that become the over-used hook for a fair portion of forum posts recently? I don't like the trend, but I at least know to actually read the OP before over-reacting to a thread title.
I’ll give a direct comparison. Guild Wars 2 is both a great MMO and a great RPG, so anyone who plays offline RPGs like Skyrim or online RPGs like Diablo III is going to love Guild Wars 2. Those games cost $60. Compared to them, Guild Wars 2 has at least as much content, world exploration, personal storylines, and replayability.
Eh. I wonder if I'll be able to get my dad into this. He loves the TES series, but I think GW2 will still be too weird for him.
I think most people who love the TES series will enjoy GW2 and with out a subscription fee it actually is easier to recommend to players who don't usually play MMOs, since you aren't giving them a recommendation that is going to require an ongoing financial commitment. It's hard to imagine a game giving as much "bang for the buck" for $60 as GW2. Even if played almost like a solo RPG, with out getting into the social aspects or SPVP/WvW, it would still be possible to get hundreds of hours of game play from the game, with out being repetative.
Stop buying unproven multiplayer games on day one if you value your money, thats my stance.
Best advice right there. Don't know if you'll like the game? Then don't buy it until you got a chance to test it first.
Seconded. OP you should NEVER buy a game until either you test it, or, better IMO, wait a month after launch, specially in the mmo genre. After all the problems with themeparks in the last years, it woud recomend you wait for players to play at least 50% of the content and reach endgame to see how the whole thing is like.
Do i think GW2 will be worth it because it doesn't have a sub? Yes, but wait a month to be sure. You don't lose anything.
Comments
I've already recieved more out of my beta weekend for my pre-purchase then I recieved from the steaming pile of crap that is d3.
D3 was the most dissapointing game of this decade for me. Guild Wars 2 would be hard pressed to meet that distinction. Plus you have a company that is more customer friendly behind it. Blizzard is notorious for milking shipped content until the very last second, then releasing addons.
I feel sorry for anyone who bought Dioblo 3...
As if u thought Blizzard was going to serve you something creative, or better than before. They have been punch drunk on cash for so long, they haven't leaned the hard lessons SOE has.
Sad... really.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
D3 was totally worth 60 bucks. Best game ever? No but considering 60 bucks is the average price every single game is released at it was way better then a ton of games in that price range. GW2 I think will totally be worth 60 bucks. But then again I thought SWTOR was very much worth 60 bucks as well, not as a MMO but within one month I ran through the very well written class story line to level 50 had a blast with pre 50 warzones and think I got my 60 bucks worth. And I think GW2 will most likely keep me hooked at least as long as SWTOR did so 60 bucks well spent. Like someone was saying I will get more enjoyment out of a game like GW2 then a night at the bar or going to a baseball game or even by the time you go to a movie and by popcorn and a drink your almost up to 60 bucks these days it seems.
80 hours and counting... great h&s, fun game. Worth every penny.
I'm confused by the sound of your post you have not bought Diablo 3 or played through it so how can you be so certain it was not worth the cash for it? I don't think it's really fair to review a game you haven't played based on issues and things you have read about in posts and what maybe watched some youtube videos of it. That is like watching a movie trailer and talking to a friend that had seen it and then saying you didn't like it.
I really don't know what you're trying to achieve by starting a flame-inducing thread? You realize there may be people on here who like DIII?
So I thought DIII was worth $60 and you think it wasn't but you're asking me if I think another game is worth if while I thought the first game was worth it? What sense does that make?
This.
I know, right.
I concur.
D3 might have its shortcomings but all the negative ratings on Metacritic are hardly deserved. I get the feeling that people who are disappointed with D3 either have never played D2 or completely forgot what it was. It seems they expected a MMO but D3 isn't exactly a MMO, it's an Action-RPG game.
Online-only DRM (which is about the only valid point) aside your average negative "review" of D3 boils down to:
1) 10 years old graphics, cartoonish look. (I'm sorry, but vanilla NWN is exactly 10 years old. One screenshow would be enough to see the difference. D3 isn't cutting-edge if you compare to Crysis 2 with DX11 and high-res texture pack but for a DX9 game it has decent graphics. And re. art... ever played Torchlight or WoW? Now that's cartoonish. D3 isn't cartoonish at all..)
2) Repetitive, less character customization. (Seriously, try playing D2. Say, a typical Blizzard/Meteor sorc would alternate between these two skills and that's *all*. Ah yeah, once in a while you renew buffs or use teleport to get somewhere faster. Tons of variety and tactical choices, right. And yes. there was only one viable way to spend stat points: just enough in str/dex to wear you endgame gear, rest in vit.)
3) Poor storyline. (I've seen worse, much worse. Besides, was it any better in D2? In D2/LoD nobody even bothered to explain anything. What was Andariel doing in the Monastery? What was Duriel doing in Tal Rasha's tomb? What did Baal do while his brothers were being killed? And that's main story. Side quests - forget about any explanation at all.)
4) Normal is too easy. (Try inferno. 'nuff sad. )
---
Long story short people hate D3 for being a Diablo series game.
MMORPG genre is dead. Long live MMOCS (Massively Multiplayer Online Cash Shop).
lol my thoughts reading this thread:
A subjective question will always give you many subjective answers.
I agree completely with your post. I thought it had a very solid(not the best but very solid) storyline especially compared to alot of storylines these days. Only thing I did not like was they did not wrap things up very well in the end there are a lot of side story things and people that were building that kind of never got resolved or you kind of were left with the feeling of "what happened to them/here" But that could just be a open door for addon content and not truly lazy unfinished story telling.
I think DIII got a backlash due to it's mere overall popularity. Blizzard had some of the most difficult launches because of simply how many people tried to log into that poor game. Then, with more people, you get more disagreements. A lot of people have really weird expectations considering this is a 10 year sequel and we know how that goes. Also a lot of people played too many MMO's and treat DIII like one (all the talk about endgame, progression, wtf?). Then complain they "finished" the game and have nothing to do (???). Some are actually DII vets who were attracted to DII's drawbacks (rushing, boss runs, FFA loot), while they really should be playing PoE. A lot of complaints are very, very strange. I found very little logic in most of DIII's reviews. Seriously how many more times are people going to bring up attribute points?
I had some disappointments with DIII myself. It could have been a better game. It's still the best Hack&Slash released since Diablo II / Nox, though, and it's definitely worth $60 far more than most games on the market...
I think the game is worth the price; just be sure your PC has a decent video card; I got a 10% discount when I bought it online. Best thing is all the stuff the devs said the game will have are in-game. Hopefully nothing is removed by launch.
So a poster makes a thread with D3 in the title saying he personally doesn't think D3 is worth 60$ and suddenly a discussion starts wether D3 is worth it or not.... this thread should've been locked a long time ago since the answer is obvious (to the poster not to the discussion about D3 :P) and was given at the very first page
Block the trolls, don't answer them, so we can remove the garbage from these forums
Yes. This is why you do not start threads with inflammatory titles.
That wasn't a personal opinion there. He's stating it as a fact. Besides, the whole idea of the thread is kinda useless. People on a GW2 forums obviously are not gonna think GW2 is worth paying for. /sarcasm
Troll thread if I ever saw one.
Hold off buying GW2 until there is a solid release date. We are far from release and don't know what changes they are going to make to the game. Many games are not as good at launch as the betas.
I would say I might have gotten enough gameplay hours in D3 to say it was worth it but the game needs a lot of work.
GW2 is probably worth its price tag as well. However, release is probably still rather far away (several months I guess) and one BWE per month just isn't enough. In fact, I absolutely don't get why ANet doesn't run a continuous closed beta. After all, almost all "testers" have pre-purchased the game. Why can't they just play beta when they want to?
MMORPG genre is dead. Long live MMOCS (Massively Multiplayer Online Cash Shop).
Yes it is well known the devs work for years to have most of the content changed prior to launch! Sorry, this is ArenaNet who has a solid reputation. What are they going to change that would make it worth less than $60? I have already gotten almost $60 worth of enjoyment just from the BWE and I have only opened 2% of the world with one toon. I'm not trying to being rude but that makes no sense.
edit: changed
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
Directly from Mike O’Brien:
I think Guild Wars 2 is one of the best values in gaming, period. Where else can you get this many hours of enjoyment, of content, of polish, of replayability for $60?
I’ll give a direct comparison. Guild Wars 2 is both a great MMO and a great RPG, so anyone who plays offline RPGs like Skyrim or online RPGs like Diablo III is going to love Guild Wars 2. Those games cost $60. Compared to them, Guild Wars 2 has at least as much content, world exploration, personal storylines, and replayability. And then for no additional charge, Guild Wars 2 gives you a fully persistent world where you can hang out with your friends online, lots of social features, a live team dedicated to introducing lots of new content into the game, and two integrated forms of [player-versus-player].
http://venturebeat.com/2012/05/21/guild-wars-2-interview-monetization/#s:guildwars2-16
Yes i think its worth 60$
~The only opinion that matters is your own.Everything else is just advice,~
Eh. I wonder if I'll be able to get my dad into this. He loves the TES series, but I think GW2 will still be too weird for him.
You know you have 30 days to get a refund just for not liking the game.
"My Fantasy is having two men at once...
One Cooking and One Cleaning!"
---------------------------
"A good man can make you feel sexy,
strong and able to take on the whole world...
oh sorry...that's wine...wine does that..."
I definitely think GW2 will be worth the $120 I paid for two copies. Judging solely on my own experience in the BWE, it would be worth the money if released right now. However, I'd probably think differently if I had been one of the unlucky ones to have run into the issues I've heard about. I didn't have those issues, though.
As for D3, I know a lot of people think that game is worth the $60 for it. I didn't buy it as I'm not the biggest Diablo fan (although D2 was fun) but many, many people are still getting their money's worth on that game so it can't be that bad. Yeah, some people have gripes about it, but isn't that every $60 game? I've never seen or heard of a game that didn't have its detractors.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
Be afraid.....The dragons are HERE!
GW2 is a MMORPG, this in my opinion makes it worth $60. Even better there is no monthly sub which makes it even more worth the $60.
AMD Phenum II x4 3.6Ghz 975 black edition
8 gig Ram
Nvidia GeForce GTX 760
The thread was actually fine until page 6. I think most of us understood that the OP personally felt D3 wasn't worth the $60 and was wondering what re-assurances their might be that he won't feel the same way if he buys GW2. Whether or not D3 is worth $60 is subjective and most people in the thread didn't even touch the arguement, because it just wasn't relavent. As far as inflamatory thread titles, hasn't that become the over-used hook for a fair portion of forum posts recently? I don't like the trend, but I at least know to actually read the OP before over-reacting to a thread title.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
I think most people who love the TES series will enjoy GW2 and with out a subscription fee it actually is easier to recommend to players who don't usually play MMOs, since you aren't giving them a recommendation that is going to require an ongoing financial commitment. It's hard to imagine a game giving as much "bang for the buck" for $60 as GW2. Even if played almost like a solo RPG, with out getting into the social aspects or SPVP/WvW, it would still be possible to get hundreds of hours of game play from the game, with out being repetative.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Seconded. OP you should NEVER buy a game until either you test it, or, better IMO, wait a month after launch, specially in the mmo genre. After all the problems with themeparks in the last years, it woud recomend you wait for players to play at least 50% of the content and reach endgame to see how the whole thing is like.
Do i think GW2 will be worth it because it doesn't have a sub? Yes, but wait a month to be sure. You don't lose anything.
The game will be well worth the $60 to some people.