Gaming news sites rush to print strawman lies in defense of Diablo 3

[shortylickens]

This has been my biggest gripe thus far. I don't sit down to game for 12 hours strait and beat the game in the first day/week of a games launch. I have a life, and have a lot of shit to do. I had to work on my sprinkler system one night after work, do other things the next night - didn't even start the game until last night and try to play for 1-2 hrs which is the most I ever would play until a weekend and BAMMMM!!!

I first can't connect. And then I'm in a queue, seriously? A fucking queue for a single player game? Fuck you Blizzard.

Finally get on, cool. Play for 20 mins and BAMMMM!! Disconnected. Apparently there was a server disconnecting message that I didn't notice with all the dialog that I saw when getting kicked and was on the main page. OK. Eat dinner. Go back.

Seems I lost about 20 mins of my play but oh well. Wow this is the very beginning on Old Tristram road and its completely different then the last time I came through here. Amazing recreation of the levels. But oh crap. My character is now hopping around and I go pick up an item and he teleports to the place I was 20 seconds ago. Connection issues I guess and then BAMMM!!! DC'd again.

This went on for the next hour of me trying to play the game. The only cool thing that happened was to see how crazy the level creation is on this game. I remember in Titans Quest and in Diablo they had this but the levels were still mostly the same. In D3, the cathedral was completely different the 2 times I had to enter it because I was disconnected.

Diablo 1 and Titan Quest had set maps. There was never variation. Diablo 2 had random variation for some areas but not everything. It didnt really matter too much cuz the world isnt as richly detailed at TQ.
During the Beta I did not notice randomization of any areas, but I only played through once with a barbarian and just for an hour with a wizard.

 

[RPD]

I wish more people would stop buying games based purely on past experiences.

I'll add - http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-diablo-iii-represents-gamings-annoying-future/

And if you are someone who didn't buy or isn't into D3, but loved D2. I suggest googling Diablo 2 the hell unleashed, it's a DAMN impressive mod.

 

[shortylickens]

I wish more people would stop buying games based purely on past experiences.

I'll add - http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-diablo-iii-represents-gamings-annoying-future/

And if you are someone who didn't buy or isn't into D3, but loved D2. I suggest googling Diablo 2 the hell unleashed, it's a DAMN impressive mod.

Yeah, theres too many crappy sequels in both the gaming and movie industries for you to just blindly make a purchase. I suspect thats where many of SC2's sales came from. People just assumed they would like it. Also that cracked article talks about things most of us have already known for some time. Its not really a revelation (though as always it is very funny)

 

[AMDZen]

Diablo 1 and Titan Quest had set maps. There was never variation. Diablo 2 had random variation for some areas but not everything. It didnt really matter too much cuz the world isnt as richly detailed at TQ.
During the Beta I did not notice randomization of any areas, but I only played through once with a barbarian and just for an hour with a wizard.

Titans Quest had the same random variation as Diablo 2 which is what I was talking about.

You seem to have missed the entire point of my post though - the only good thing about the game is something I shouldn't even know exists this early. Just as you haven't noticed it yet.

Because I've had to re-play through a few parts from the very first part of the game, its taken me probably close to 2 hours to reach the Cathedral (first check point in the cathedral) even though its probably less than 30 minutes of real game play because I had to repeat 2-3 of the areas over again after being disconnected for no reason.

Although it is kind of cool to see the world change that much, I still say FUUUUU to Blizzard

 

[Stuka87]

Diablo 1 and Titan Quest had set maps. There was never variation. Diablo 2 had random variation for some areas but not everything. It didnt really matter too much cuz the world isnt as richly detailed at TQ.
During the Beta I did not notice randomization of any areas, but I only played through once with a barbarian and just for an hour with a wizard.

Diablo 1 had maps that were nearly fully random. Diablo 2 was less random than Diablo 1 was. There as only a few set areas in Diablo 1.

 

[Majes]

Ive played the game for over 20 hours already. I've beaten normal and I'm crawling through nightmare. The game is not too easy. It is also not too short. The always online thing sucks. It really does. However, it's already been beaten to death and they have good reasons for doing it along with the bad reasons.

A lot of people are complaining about things that are the norm in a hack and slash game. However I do have some complaints...

#1. Why is so much of the game just a repeat of Diablo 2? Not saying the story is exactly the same, but the areas and the monsters are re-skins of the previous game. After SC2 I should have expected this, but I think with the new heroes I was expecting new everything.

#2. Lack if item diversification: I still believe Diablo 2 had the best item finding system of all time. From act 1 normal you could find sets, rares, and uniques. I am missing this in D3... I've found 50+ rares so far but I haven't had the pleasure of seeing other colours... I miss that a lot...

This is the same thing that happened with Starcraft 2. Blizzard should have released the game with 3 campaigns and clans and chat rooms and tournaments and other new things. Diablo 3 should have released with 5 Acts, and more items, and runes (something other than just gems...). But Blizzard has realized that instead of innovating they can save those things for an expansion and people will buy it.

I will buy it... Because even with the disappointments I still need games to play and Blizzard still makes the best even if they are really just upgraded versions of the previous iterations...

 

[Atomic Playboy]

The title is utterly irrelevant; this shouldn't be happening in ANY game. I have no interest in Diablo 3, but if you pay for a single-player game, there is absolutely no reason to require that you be online to play it, or to save progress anywhere but your own hard drive, or to allow other people to jump into your game unannounced... If you're going to have a single-player component, it needs to work as a standalone component, not as though you're running around in an empty server. That's just common sense. I have a hard time believing that no one at Blizzard foresaw these issues, and it really is inexcusable for them to release the game with the fairly serious game-breaking bug of "you can't actually play the game."

I don't like it when people review games early and knock points off for bugs. Those bugs get patched later, but the review never changes to acknowledge it, so if someone looks at the aggregate score later, it's brought down based on issues that no longer exist. But overly excessive DRM that requires you to be connected to Blizzard at ALL TIMES when playing the game isn't just a bug that will be patched, it's an integral part of the game, and that's definitely worth mentioning in a review. If Blizzard has ANY problem on their end, your product is inaccesible; that's all fine and dandy for an MMO, but it's inexcusable for a single-player adventure game.

 

[momeNt]

If always on DRM is something that is needed to turn my time on Diablo 3 into a profitable investment via the real money auction house, then so be it.

I'll be raking in dough managing Diablo III farmers, and all of it will be perfectly kosher under the EULA!

 

[Tweak155]

As someone who pays 60 dollars for a product or service, I am ENTITLED to have and use it as I see fit. If I bought a camera or car or lawnmower and it didnt work right you better believe I'm returning it. And if I couldnt I'd call the BBB and give them all the info and let them deal with it.
If the game were free then whining would be unjustified.

Ya know, I've always thought myself as well, but according to the Publishers and many on this site . . . that's just not how it's supposed to work.

Never could understand that kind of thinking . . . just one of my many faults I guess :whiste:


.

While some DRM might fall under this, the online only is your fault (assuming you buy it). It has been designed as an online game. You don't buy a plane ticket (a specific form of travel, while Diablo 3 is a specific form of a video game) then ask why you have to go in the air when you go to use the ticket. Want to travel on the ground? Buy a train or bus ticket. Want to play a game offline? Buy a game designed to be played offline. Always online was on the box and well known before anyone bought the game. You got what you were told you were going to get. Whining about it now (or ever, really) is pointless. Just because YOU think it should have the ability to be played offline, doesn't mean that is now magically what it is. The only valid argument is that the servers are down / not working.

 

[Tweak155]

The title is utterly irrelevant; this shouldn't be happening in ANY game. I have no interest in Diablo 3, but if you pay for a single-player game, <snip>

First off it isn't just a single player game, so you didn't pay for a single player game only. Second, single player is not the same as offline play. There are lots of web browser games that you play online yet you're the only player. Single player != offline play.

 

[Tweak155]

To be clear, I don't like that it is online only either. I also think it is stupid and only hurts the paying customer. However, you always have the right not to buy the game. They didn't hide these facts prior to any purchases.

 

[Axon]

As someone who pays 60 dollars for a product or service, I am ENTITLED to have and use it as I see fit. If I bought a camera or car or lawnmower and it didnt work right you better believe I'm returning it. And if I couldnt I'd call the BBB and give them all the info and let them deal with it.
If the game were free then whining would be unjustified.

I would agree, if you didn't know that you were buying a product with always online DRM. Which anyone who bought Diablo 3 did. Don't take this as support for DRM, it is not.

 

[Ferzerp]

I would agree, if you didn't know that you were buying a product with always online DRM. Which anyone who bought Diablo 3 did. Don't take this as support for DRM, it is not.

It's more a heavily instanced no-monthly-fee mmo than it is a single player game with DRM...

To the guy making up "cracked copy on the interwebs" stories above: Heh, you really, really have no clue. You can't "crack" a lack of server side code in the client.

That's like "cracking" a telnet client to work with no server...

 

[Atomic Playboy]

First off it isn't just a single player game, so you didn't pay for a single player game only. Second, single player is not the same as offline play. There are lots of web browser games that you play online yet you're the only player. Single player != offline play.

First off, let's not compare a flash-based browser plugin game to a game that you shell out $60 for and install on your own machine. They're two completely different things and they should be treated as such. The main issue that people are getting at is that the game offers a singleplayer component. Battlefield 1942 was multiplayer as well, but it still had a singleplayer mode where you could load a map with bots and not be connected to the internet. GTAIV is a singleplayer game where you can hop online at any point, but you don't need to be connected to the internet to play the singleplayer campaign. If you call any part of your game "singleplayer," it should be accessible while not connected to the internet. And it DAMN sure better not drop you or lose your progress if an internet server goes down somewhere. That is inexcusably stupid from a design standpoint.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

You don't buy a plane ticket (a specific form of travel, while Diablo 3 is a specific form of a video game) then ask why you have to go in the air when you go to use the ticket. Want to travel on the ground? Buy a train or bus ticket.

People wouldn't buy tickets from an airline where one plane running out of fuel caused every plane in the fleet to plummet from the sky. Especially if you were flying during Christmas and the people ordering fuel were basing their estimates on February's flight numbers.

 

[Ferzerp]

First off, let's not compare a flash-based browser plugin game to a game that you shell out $60 for and install on your own machine. They're two completely different things and they should be treated as such. The main issue that people are getting at is that the game offers a singleplayer component. Battlefield 1942 was multiplayer as well, but it still had a singleplayer mode where you could load a map with bots and not be connected to the internet. GTAIV is a singleplayer game where you can hop online at any point, but you don't need to be connected to the internet to play the singleplayer campaign. If you call any part of your game "singleplayer," it should be accessible while not connected to the internet. And it DAMN sure better not drop you or lose your progress if an internet server goes down somewhere. That is inexcusably stupid from a design standpoint.

But D3 has no single player mode at all. The closest thing is private multiplayer that you've invited no one to.

 

[PrayForDeath]

Diablo 1 and Titan Quest had set maps. There was never variation. Diablo 2 had random variation for some areas but not everything. It didnt really matter too much cuz the world isnt as richly detailed at TQ.

Nah dude, Diablo 1 had crazy randomization. I played through it many times back in the day, and every time I would get a completely different dungeon layout.

 

[randay]

after you see the cinematic at the end of act 3, none of this shit matters.

 

[shortylickens]

after you see the cinematic at the end of act 3, none of this shit matters.

If I cant GET to Act 3 then none of THAT matters!

 

[blastingcap]

http://www.gamefront.com/why-im-afraid-to-review-diablo-3/

 

[Tweak155]

First off, let's not compare a flash-based browser plugin game to a game that you shell out $60 for and install on your own machine. They're two completely different things and they should be treated as such. The main issue that people are getting at is that the game offers a singleplayer component. Battlefield 1942 was multiplayer as well, but it still had a singleplayer mode where you could load a map with bots and not be connected to the internet. GTAIV is a singleplayer game where you can hop online at any point, but you don't need to be connected to the internet to play the singleplayer campaign. If you call any part of your game "singleplayer," it should be accessible while not connected to the internet. And it DAMN sure better not drop you or lose your progress if an internet server goes down somewhere. That is inexcusably stupid from a design standpoint.

So what? Go play those games then. This never advertised it would have that. You think it is stupid, we get it. But you're not being shorted on something you were told you would have. This is an online game. It is like crying about WoW not having an offline aspect. You'd be stupid to expect it upon buying it.

People wouldn't buy tickets from an airline where one plane running out of fuel caused every plane in the fleet to plummet from the sky. Especially if you were flying during Christmas and the people ordering fuel were basing their estimates on February's flight numbers.

Not sure how this applies as an argument (if that is what it is)? This is not related to always online DRM, and I stated the only valid complaint is that the servers are down.

 

[shortylickens]

So what? Go play those games then. This never advertised it would have that. You think it is stupid, we get it. But you're not being shorted on something you were told you would have. This is an online game. It is like crying about WoW not having an offline aspect. You'd be stupid to expect it upon buying it.




Not sure how this applies as an argument (if that is what it is)? This is not related to always online DRM, and I stated the only valid complaint is that the servers are down.

WRONG!

Diablo 3 is only online cuz blizzard made it that way. It has single player component but you can only access it online, which is stupid. And we are NOT wrong about this.

 

[Ferzerp]

WRONG!

Diablo 3 is only online cuz blizzard made it that way. It has single player component but you can only access it online, which is stupid. And we are NOT wrong about this.

Oh really? Tell me where this mythical single player component is?

All I know of is the mode with private multiplayer than I can at any point invite a friend to, or open up to the public.

I just can't seem to find single player mode... Hmm. That must only be in the "knew what I was buying, but am pretending I didn't so that I can internet rage edition"

 

[Tweak155]

WRONG!

Diablo 3 is only online cuz blizzard made it that way. It has single player component but you can only access it online, which is stupid. And we are NOT wrong about this.

I like the big capital letters as though you have thus proved something "better" than regular characters, lol.

That said, read bolded, then also apply that to WoW (same as you do to Diablo 3). No KIDDING Blizzard made it that way, they made the game, right?? Same with WoW. Quite frankly I don't think I can explain something so simple any further.

Yes, it has a SINGLE PLAYER component, not an OFFLINE component.

 

[Tweak155]

Oh really? Tell me where this mythical single player component is?

All I know of is the mode with private multiplayer than I can at any point invite a friend to, or open up to the public.

I just can't seem to find single player mode... Hmm. That must only be in the "knew what I was buying, but am pretending I didn't so that I can internet rage edition"

And even if you did find a "Single Player" button, it doesn't say "Offline Single Player", unless it did of course