sick of new games. going back in time

[ImpulsE69]

The main issue here is the fact that people go along with it. Further more people defend it as if there is no issue with it happening. Setting precedents like this is how even MORE happens with later developments. If you don't like it, then complain and don't buy.

Buying it, playing it, and bitching does nothing because they have your money and have proved that it works. If enough people complain with reasonable reasons it is possible it can change (it's happened in the past).

The ones just blowing people off with "you're not the target audience", and "not a single player game" are the short sighted ones.

It is a move to control and money grab veiled in the ever increasing "piracy" cloak. I fault both sides, those who bought it and complain and those who defend it as acceptable.

It was well known long before this game came out that it was online only. Any coherent gamer (especially on this forum) should have realized what this meant. I disagree that this is not a single player game, even though I've never played single player in a Diablo game in the past, I completely get the idea and how requiring online access to play this game is pure BS.

There are ulterior motives here no matter how you they try to spin it and it all points to the auction house.

 

[Tweak155]

The main issue here is the fact that people go along with it. Further more people defend it as if there is no issue with it happening. Setting precedents like this is how even MORE happens with later developments. If you don't like it, then complain and don't buy.

Buying it, playing it, and bitching does nothing because they have your money and have proved that it works. If enough people complain with reasonable reasons it is possible it can change (it's happened in the past).

The ones just blowing people off with "you're not the target audience", and "not a single player game" are the short sighted ones.

It is a move to control and money grab veiled in the ever increasing "piracy" cloak. I fault both sides, those who bought it and complain and those who defend it as acceptable.

It was well known long before this game came out that it was online only. Any coherent gamer (especially on this forum) should have realized what this meant. I disagree that this is not a single player game, even though I've never played single player in a Diablo game in the past, I completely get the idea and how requiring online access to play this game is pure BS.

There are ulterior motives here no matter how you they try to spin it and it all points to the auction house.

Actually the people stating that it is a single player game are the blind ones, because it isn't. Just because it is feasible to play the whole game solo (which is not even confirmed), does not make it a single player game.

And again, you're mixing up that it is being defended rather than explained. It is annoying when people try and assign attributes to something that never claimed or tried to be a certain way. It is like me calling you a girl because you look like one, even though your entire composition is male. It is hugely ignorant.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Can you play it by yourself? Oh..wait.

It's annoying when people preach the same thing and don't listen to reason, kind of like what you are doing.

 

[thespyder]

Actually the people stating that it is a single player game are the blind ones, because it isn't. Just because it is feasible to play the whole game solo (which is not even confirmed), does not make it a single player game.

And again, you're mixing up that it is being defended rather than explained. It is annoying when people try and assign attributes to something that never claimed or tried to be a certain way. It is like me calling you a girl because you look like one, even though your entire composition is male. It is hugely ignorant.

I don't think things are anywhere near as clear cut as you are making them out to be. Diablo as a franchise has historically been a hybrid single player/multi-player game. it isn't an MMO. And the mere fact that there is a single player component completely destroys your argument. It isn't just "Feasible" to play single player. There is actually game design around single player elements.

But that doesn't make it EITHER Single player or Multi-player. Because if it were STRICTLY a Multi-player game, no one would complain about it being always online.

And your posts are very definitely in defense of Blizzard. And your blanket statements about 'You aren't the target market' are completely unfounded. The simple fact of the matter is, if Blizzard wasn't interested in consumers who played the single player element, they wouldn't have put resources into that element of the game. Ipso-facto.

As for 'Whining', I think you really need to look up the definition. Sure there are some who merely scream to the heavens that something SUX, but that is far different from actually giving feedback in a community of gamers. A community where gamers go to read about the games on the market and what other gamers find both good and bad about those games. And Posting here about elements that were poorly chosen (as seen by some gamers) actually influences other potential consumers either towards or against purchasing of the game.

I realize that it is a bit of a stretch for some people to understand that talking about a game in an intelligent manner, to consumers might cause loss of sales and potentially influence the game developers themselves, but it does happen. And who is to say that we aren't posting these types of things on the Blizzard web site as well? What is wrong with a two pronged approach to bringing about change?

 

[Tweak155]

Can you play it by yourself? Oh..wait.

It's annoying when people preach the same thing and don't listen to reason, kind of like what you are doing.

I'm not sure if you're trolling, but you can play a lot of multiplayer games by yourself. It does not make it a single player game. Additionally (and the most important point), there is no requirement to make it an offline single player game. Even if no one else could join your game, Blizzard (or anyone making any game) can opt to make it online only for any reason they wish. Again, you vote with your wallet.

Should Blizzard have required 2 people minimum in a game at all times in order for you to see what you're not getting?

Quite frankly I view this as a troll response, I won't respond if the next is the same / similar.

 

[Tweak155]

I don't think things are anywhere near as clear cut as you are making them out to be. Diablo as a franchise has historically been a hybrid single player/multi-player game. it isn't an MMO. And the mere fact that there is a single player component completely destroys your argument. It isn't just "Feasible" to play single player. There is actually game design around single player elements.

But that doesn't make it EITHER Single player or Multi-player. Because if it were STRICTLY a Multi-player game, no one would complain about it being always online.

And your posts are very definitely in defense of Blizzard. And your blanket statements about 'You aren't the target market' are completely unfounded. The simple fact of the matter is, if Blizzard wasn't interested in consumers who played the single player element, they wouldn't have put resources into that element of the game. Ipso-facto.

As for 'Whining', I think you really need to look up the definition. Sure there are some who merely scream to the heavens that something SUX, but that is far different from actually giving feedback in a community of gamers. A community where gamers go to read about the games on the market and what other gamers find both good and bad about those games. And Posting here about elements that were poorly chosen (as seen by some gamers) actually influences other potential consumers either towards or against purchasing of the game.

I realize that it is a bit of a stretch for some people to understand that talking about a game in an intelligent manner, to consumers might cause loss of sales and potentially influence the game developers themselves, but it does happen. And who is to say that we aren't posting these types of things on the Blizzard web site as well? What is wrong with a two pronged approach to bringing about change?

I have no issue, really, if you accurately debate a topic. But assigning attributes to something that are non-existent to defend your case is what makes it whining. You're whining when Blizzard never indicated Diablo 3 would be or have a single player offline game. You can, however, complain it doesn't have these attributes. But don't say it is something it is not.

Again, I'm not defending Blizzard's choice. I'm defending what they've created vs what you're trying to assign to it as a fact. Just because you can play it by yourself does not make it a single player game, and furthermore (if it was) it does not create some requirement to be played offline.

 

[Martimus]

Please don't respond regardless, since this is NOT a thread about Diablo 3, and all of your posts have been about that game. There are multiple other threads about the very topic you are posting about, where posting such thoughts would be appropriate.

If you have any insight into the benefits of playing older games rather than newer games, feel free to post those comments in this thread.

 

[Maximilian]

Ok? If you completely ignore the positive reviews, sure there is no one ok with it... Or the millions that bought it, or the billion in presales.............

Pulling numbers out your ass there :thumbsup:

Its the people who bought it who are pissed with it! lmfao... You aren't a gamer are you?

 

[Tweak155]

Please don't respond regardless, since this is NOT a thread about Diablo 3, and all of your posts have been about that game. There are multiple other threads about the very topic you are posting about, where posting such thoughts would be appropriate.

If you have any insight into the benefits of playing older games rather than newer games, feel free to post those comments in this thread.

Something I agree with

I'll refrain. I will add that I recently installed Icewind Dale 1 from images I made a long time ago. I never could get into it that far, even though people are recommending it.

 

[thespyder]

Please don't respond regardless, since this is NOT a thread about Diablo 3, and all of your posts have been about that game. There are multiple other threads about the very topic you are posting about, where posting such thoughts would be appropriate.

If you have any insight into the benefits of playing older games rather than newer games, feel free to post those comments in this thread.

Agreed and nuff said. No more feeding trolls.

Was going through my catelogue of old games last night. So far I have loaded:

BG1-2-ToB
Icewind Dale
Planescape: Torment
Galactic Civilizations 2
Sins of a Solar Empire
Neverwinter Nights 2
The Witcher
Two Worlds
Bejewelled
Morrowind
Diablo 2

I am thinking about trying DOSbox and loading up Fallout 1-2 as well. Then maybe I will reload Xcom: Apocalypse. So I think I am set for gaming for a good long time.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I was the same way with Icewind Dale, but then again, I own both original copies of BG1 and 2 and have never finished them (not even sure I started BG2). I want to like them, just couldn't play them :/

Been playing Planescape, Star Control 2, and Bloodlines Vampire:Redemption quite a bit though. Finished The Dig awhile ago too, fun adventure game if the ending leaves you feeling a bit is lacking though.

 

[thespyder]

I was the same way with Icewind Dale, but then again, I own both original copies of BG1 and 2 and have never finished them (not even sure I started BG2). I want to like them, just couldn't play them :/

I am the same with Planescape: Torment. I have owned two separate copies of the game. I have started it about a dozen times and never gotten out of the tower. I will get there someday. And since I just loaded it onto my new laptop, maybe today is the day.

 

[RPD]

I may fire up BG 1 or 2. I know I've finished BG1, but not the expansion and I had a log of time logged in BG2 years ago but didn't complete it before formatting the wrong drive...

Isn't there a hi-res mod for BG1 or 2?

 

[thespyder]

I may fire up BG 1 or 2. I know I've finished BG1, but not the expansion and I had a log of time logged in BG2 years ago but didn't complete it before formatting the wrong drive...

Isn't there a hi-res mod for BG1 or 2?

there is a mod for running BG1 in the BG2 engine called tutu. You can find it over on pocket planet or gibberlings3.

As far as the expansion of BG1, it isn't really a necessity for the story line. it is more or less extra stuff tacked on to the game. A few more dungeons and one or two special items. The main reason to play it is to increase the EXP Cap so that you start BG2 higher level. It's fun, but more in the line of a dungeon romp tacked on to the end of BG1.

 

[RPD]

Well I may start on that again after I finish D2 hell unleashed mod. It's really hard -_-

 

[sao123]

which is better baldurs gate 2 or diable 2??

 

[Martimus]

They are completely different games. I far prefer BG2 because Diablo 2 was way to simple and boring to me, where loot collection and getting to the next level were the only carrots really driving me forward. BG2 has engaging gameplay and story to drive you forward.

 

[yottabit]

I think the most fun I ever have playing any of my games is playing my Sega Saturn with friends. Shmups like Radiant Silvergun, fighting games like the original Dead or Alive and Fighters Megamix, racing games like Sega Rally Championship. All these games have such polished gameplay and surprisingly good graphics for their generation.

OOPs, didn't realize this was PC gaming. Well- I still really enjoy playing Warcraft 3 (and winning local WC3 tournaments )