How can someone seriously say the graphics of Torch Light 2 are better than D3?

[Lonyo]

This is exactly what I hate. Why are you guys complaining about requiring an internet connection, its 2012, you are always connected to the internet anyways so what is the big fn deal?

If you dont like it dont play, and if the internet or their servers go down, turn your computer off and go do something else.

If their servers are mostly down from at least 3pm to 11pm (and possibly beyond) on a weekday evening, which is pretty much prime relaxation time, it's a problem.

People have limited amounts of free time, you are saying that if they want to do something, and can't, they shouldn't complain, even though it should be reasonable to expect them to be able to do the thing they want.
And it's not an isolated incident, since the servers have been shitty since launch, off and on.

 

[titan131]

Diablo 3 its quite addicting, much more than Diablo 2 or 1.

In my case I don't think it's possible for a game to be more addictive than D2 was. If it was then I would probs die from exhaustion or starvation

This is exactly what I hate. Why are you guys complaining about requiring an internet connection, its 2012, you are always connected to the internet anyways so what is the big fn deal?

If you dont like it dont play, and if the internet or their servers go down, turn your computer off and go do something else.

Well, my connection is slow and unreliable and I want to play when it's convenient to me, not when my connection happens to be working or when the servers happen to be working or w/e. And then there's lag spikes and the possibility of losing your progress. Definitely a step backwards for consumers IMO.

Edit: Just read thespyder's posts and I concur.

 

[Arsinek]

In my case I don't think it's possible for a game to be more addictive than D2 was. If it was then I would probs die from exhaustion or starvation

Well, my connection is slow and unreliable and I want to play when it's convenient to me, not when my connection happens to be working or when the servers happen to be working or w/e. And then there's lag spikes and the possibility of losing your progress. Definitely a step backwards for consumers IMO.

Edit: Just read thespyder's posts and I concur.

Where do you live that has such bad internet?

 

[titan131]

Where do you live that has such bad internet?

A village in the south of England.

 

[Arsinek]

If their servers are mostly down from at least 3pm to 11pm (and possibly beyond) on a weekday evening, which is pretty much prime relaxation time, it's a problem.

People have limited amounts of free time, you are saying that if they want to do something, and can't, they shouldn't complain, even though it should be reasonable to expect them to be able to do the thing they want.
And it's not an isolated incident, since the servers have been shitty since launch, off and on.

Weird. There are a lot of people at my work that play this game and dont seem to be having the problems youre having.

This whole thing is starting to remind me of run away Toyotas, the only place they exist is in the media.

 

[Arsinek]

A village in the south of England.

Well no one cares about you.

jk.

I guess it comes down to what will make Blizz money and what wont. Unfortunately you get the consequences.

 

[titan131]

Well no one cares about you.

jk.

I guess it comes down to what will make Blizz money and what wont. Unfortunately you get the consequences.

Yeah man. Just business as usual as far as Blizz is concerned

 

[digitaldurandal]

Weird. There are a lot of people at my work that play this game and dont seem to be having the problems youre having.

This whole thing is starting to remind me of run away Toyotas, the only place they exist is in the media.

The servers were down for 4 hours right after launch, the servers for the first 2 days had pings in the 400+ for me. My normal ping to servers is less than 100. The game has had multiple hot patches and emergency maintenances which have lasted multiple hours.

It isn't something that only exists in the media just because YOU haven't had an issue. Which just means you have not been playing that much because they have had at least over a day (24h) worth of downtime on the game since launch.

 

[Lonyo]

Weird. There are a lot of people at my work that play this game and dont seem to be having the problems youre having.

This whole thing is starting to remind me of run away Toyotas, the only place they exist is in the media.

Servers are screwed again right now.
And Blizzard themselves have had notices up at various times saying there are problems.
And the Battle.net forums are full of people saying they have problems and complaining.
PLENTY of people are having serious problems with being able to play the game at all, and it's easy to find evidence that it's reasonably widespread as well.

Just because you have been lucky and/or aren't in Europe doesn't mean Blizzard haven't massively screwed up, which can only be good for the Torchlight 2 guys. They can just advertise as "It's a game... and you can actually play it!"

 

[Krakn3Dfx]

The graphics in Diablo 3 are definitely better than Torghlight 2.

Until Blizzard takes down the servers for maintenance. Which seems to be an ongoing, regular thing now, like they do with WoW. Pretty sure I never have to worry about torchlight 2 servers going down for maintenance.

Dont' get me wrong, I love Diablo 3, and I've loved what I've seen in the TL2 beta, but I still contend that Blizzard and any other company that does it goes too far when they require 100% online connectivity to play a game in SP if I choose to do that. I understand why they did it, and what it accomplishes, but as someone who plays alone and doesn't have any interest in the auction house, it's irritating that they've gone in this direction. And at least 2-3 times a play session, I get the weird rubber banding lag issue. Yeah, I guess it could be my internet connection, but that's kind of beside the point.

 

[thespyder]

Where do you live that has such bad internet?

Does it matter? If they live some place that has a slower connection than you, does that invalidate their experiences?

I have a cousin who lives on the top of a mountain. He has a house the size of a small hotel, including 7 bathrooms, 2 separate computer 'game' rooms, an Olympic size pool in the back and a helicopter pad on the roof. He has more money than I will ever see in my lifetime. But he has HORRIBLE internet. And he is a much more avid gamer than I am with a rig that puts most high end machines to shame.

A bunch of us used to go over to his house and we would have LAN parties all weekend long playing Diablo 2 and various other Party games. Since he has 10 computers (plus his super computer that puts Skynet to shame) all networked together and a bunch of us would sit and game for HOURS.

Is his disappointment in not being able to play Diablo 3, even in single player mode, invalid merely because the internet connection isn't great?

Yet, by your approbation, I gather that Blizzard shouldn't care about his business. And that his dissatisfaction at the decisions made by Blizzard in the manufacture of this game isn't valid. Merely because his internet connection isn't up to your standards, he should just lump it.

 

[Arsinek]

Does it matter? If they live some place that has a slower connection than you, does that invalidate their experiences?

I have a cousin who lives on the top of a mountain. He has a house the size of a small hotel, including 7 bathrooms, 2 separate computer 'game' rooms, an Olympic size pool in the back and a helicopter pad on the roof. He has more money than I will ever see in my lifetime. But he has HORRIBLE internet. And he is a much more avid gamer than I am with a rig that puts most high end machines to shame.

A bunch of us used to go over to his house and we would have LAN parties all weekend long playing Diablo 2 and various other Party games. Since he has 10 computers (plus his super computer that puts Skynet to shame) all networked together and a bunch of us would sit and game for HOURS.

Is his disappointment in not being able to play Diablo 3, even in single player mode, invalid merely because the internet connection isn't great?

Yet, by your approbation, I gather that Blizzard shouldn't care about his business. And that his dissatisfaction at the decisions made by Blizzard in the manufacture of this game isn't valid. Merely because his internet connection isn't up to your standards, he should just lump it.

Lol, does it matter to me? No. Does it matter to Blizzard? It depends on what makes them money and what doesnt. Seems a lot of people forget making video games is a business. From a business standpoint Blizzard must have felt the rewards out weighed the risks for making the game online only. You can complain as much as you want but if it benefits Blizzard the most to make a game online only thats what theyll do. Now if the little bit of trouble they had at launch due to the always online thing turns out to effect their money then theyll change it. Thats life.

 

[Arsinek]

Servers are screwed again right now.
And Blizzard themselves have had notices up at various times saying there are problems.
And the Battle.net forums are full of people saying they have problems and complaining.
PLENTY of people are having serious problems with being able to play the game at all, and it's easy to find evidence that it's reasonably widespread as well.

Just because you have been lucky and/or aren't in Europe doesn't mean Blizzard haven't massively screwed up, which can only be good for the Torchlight 2 guys. They can just advertise as "It's a game... and you can actually play it!"

Well, yes, Im only basing my interpretation of the situation based off people I know in real life, and yes they arnt having any problems playing.

 

[zinfamous]

This is exactly what I hate. Why are you guys complaining about requiring an internet connection, its 2012, you are always connected to the internet anyways so what is the big fn deal?

If you dont like it dont play, and if the internet or their servers go down, turn your computer off and go do something else.

So, it is unreasonable for the consumer to be able to use the product that they have purchased, in the way that they expect to be able to use it, and to expect no outlet for recourse when the manufacturer lends no ear to consumer demand?

jesus tap-dancing christ--do you work for the MPAA, or lobbying Congress, whothefuck ever, drafting asinine anti-consumer, anti-privacy bills like SOPA?

:hmm:

 

[thespyder]

Lol, does it matter to me? No. Does it matter to Blizzard? It depends on what makes them money and what doesnt. Seems a lot of people forget making video games is a business. From a business standpoint Blizzard must have felt the rewards out weighed the risks for making the game online only. You can complain as much as you want but if it benefits Blizzard the most to make a game online only thats what theyll do. Now if the little bit of trouble they had at launch due to the always online thing turns out to effect their money then theyll change it. Thats life.

Sorry, but you asked the question like it had relevance to the person's point of view. I naturally assumed you had a point to your comments.

I always find it funny when people say "the market will do XYX" and not understanding that "The market" is made up of individuals. And that Public opinion and perception drives consumer behavior.

 

[Arsinek]

Sorry, but you asked the question like it had relevance to the person's point of view. I naturally assumed you had a point to your comments.

I always find it funny when people say "the market will do XYX" and not understanding that "The market" is made up of individuals. And that Public opinion and perception drives consumer behavior.

No, you just had an incorrect assumption about why I asked the question.

And as far as markets, that really has nothing to do with what I said. I said Blizzard is going to do what makes them money. Right now, if they think its in their best interest to make their games require an online connection thats what theyre going to do. If the players lost to requiring an online connection is big enough then they will consider not requiring it in the future.

 

[Arsinek]

So, it is unreasonable for the consumer to be able to use the product that they have purchased, in the way that they expect to be able to use it, and to expect no outlet for recourse when the manufacturer lends no ear to consumer demand?

jesus tap-dancing christ--do you work for the MPAA, or lobbying Congress, whothefuck ever, drafting asinine anti-consumer, anti-privacy bills like SOPA?

:hmm:

I hope no one bought D3 with expectations of being able to play it offline.

 

[thespyder]

No, you just had an incorrect assumption about why I asked the question.

And as far as markets, that really has nothing to do with what I said. I said Blizzard is going to do what makes them money. Right now, if they think its in their best interest to make their games require an online connection thats what theyre going to do. If the players lost to requiring an online connection is big enough then they will consider not requiring it in the future.

I will correct one thing in your statement. "Blizzard will do what [they Think] will make them money." There is no guarantee that it will.

And so what you are saying is that "The Market" dictates what they choose to do. And if the market is OK with always online, so be it. But if the market starts to sway because motivated posters sway public opinion, that could make the difference. I am not putting any weight on my own ability to say anyone. But I am by no means the only person who thinks the whole Idea sucks.

Just look at what happened with the ending of ME3. Public opinion started on sites like this and on Biowares main boards lead to change. That's all I am saying.