Auction House Online: The Game (Diablo 3) is a MASSIVE decline

[Menckenstein]

My browser window and diablo loader magically layered p. well

 

[Horus]

Diablo was a singleplayer wow before mmoprg's became popular,i wonder if it will have the same popularity today.
But stll blizzards marketing department is good and they have enought fans to sold it well.

 

[aris]

Well, Blizzard are in for a real shitstorm now. Servers are down. People raging all across Europe. I reckon it'll be the same for the Americans tomorrow. Why can't Blizzard sort out their product launches?

because it would be highly irrational. invest a crapload on infrastructure to support one moment in the game's lifecycle?

Well. There's always the possibility of leasing infrastructure, they don't have to buy it permanently. But all butthurt over a bumpy launch is always forgotten by 99% within a day if it only lasts a couple of hours, so it's probably a calculated risk, where they in any case gain more than they lose.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

All of this and nothing about gameplay?

tbh the "I am halfway through the tutorial and here is what I think" posts aren't very useful either

 

[chzr]

campaign confirmed for 2 hours long.

 

[oscar]

So uh, how is it?

 

[Outlander]

If you care about the SP campaign, you might want to know that some Koreans finished it in under 5 hours (normal difficulty).

Also, here's a screenshot from the final battle.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

Managed to get in and played a little bit with an old guildie from WoW.

Gameplay is very simple and very easy but there's something relaxing about it. You basically do everything by holding LMB, not much need for anything else. RMB to use special attack on bosses and big groups, other than that, just hollllllld. I thought Diablo was all click-click-click, but there's no reason to ever take your finger off the button.

Graphics are low-res and blurry, zooming in they just look worse. Dungeon Siege III had better graphics and that was made: 1) On a much lower budget 2) By a much smaller company 3) Years ago.

 

[Mangoose]

In Korea, GMs have a thread going to manually flag digital accounts to allow them to play. Currently, there is no other way for Digital Edition players to play and they have to wait for the GMs to flag the account one by one

http://eu.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/4008631754

 

[Deleted member 7219]

Picard and the others didn't stop the music even though that man has been seriously injured. That's cold, man.

 

[sea]

All of this and nothing about gameplay?

I've only played the beta. I'm stuck on the title screen like everyone else. Extended impressions on the gameplay I have seen (before they made their sweeping balance changes a couple months ago) can be found here:

http://www.gamebanshee.com/previews/106134-diablo-iii-preview.html

To be honest, my opinion on the game has probably grown more cynical since then, but I try to be positive in previews.

 

[Jasede]

Ah well, some of us may never agree on liking or disliking certain things but at least we're all here bitching or counter-bitching together. It's the sense of community that keeps you coming back.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Rpg Codex - You'll Never Bitch Alone

 

[Outlander]

Also, here's a screenshot from the final battle.

http://www.dsogaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/diablo-3-spoiler.jpg

I fixed it, sorry.

 

[Average Manatee]

Wow, 4 hours of content. That's a pretty low mark.

 

[Jasede]

Oh come now, that's like saying Dark Souls has 30 minutes of content (because someone beat it in 30 minutes); or like saying Contra takes 20 minutes to beat.
Diablo time isn't measured that way; you are going to replay the same acts over and over again, with friends or new characters and if you like Diablo you'll like that. And if not then not, but you can't hold the time it takes to beat the game on normal against it, especially not if that time was taken by a team of Koreans that prepared by data-mining the game.

For comparison, I have 80 hours or so on my main Dark Souls character and still have not beaten the game.

 

[Stereotypical Villain]

And... I haven't got my physical copy yet thanks to the inefficiency of the Swedish postal services. With a bit of luck I'll get it later today, although I think it is far more likely that I'll get it tomorrow.... which kind of blows. But oh well, savor the anticipation and all that.

 

[Jasede]

I am sure it depends on how quickly you rush through it. People are trying to go for speed records with this game as soon as it came out- something that wasn't as popular back when D2 came out.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

http://www.dsogaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/diablo-3-spoiler.jpg

I have to say that fire pokemon looks tough but not THAT tough to be a D3 endboss

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

4-5 hours is excellent, game is geared for replaying on higher difficulties, and that means you'll hit level 30 (End of normal) in 4-5 hours so blasting through with different classes isn't as big of a time sink and you get new skills and runes fairly regularly.

 

[Average Manatee]

Oh come now, that's like saying Dark Souls has 30 minutes of content (because someone beat it in 30 minutes); or like saying Contra takes 20 minutes to beat.
Diablo time isn't measured that way; you are going to replay the same acts over and over again, with friends or new characters and if you like Diablo you'll like that. And if not then not, but you can't hold the time it takes to beat the game on normal against it, especially not if that time was taken by a team of Koreans that prepared by data-mining the game.

For comparison, I have 80 hours or so on my main Dark Souls character and still have not beaten the game.

You can't compare the first time someone is playing a game blind to speed runs. It's probably sub 3 hours for someone who actually knows the game and significantly less still with uber gear and shit. Furthermore, we've already gone over how no one will be caring about the side quests in diablo, unlike Dark Souls where you would actually spend time exploring. So Blizzard's 10-20 hours quote was pure marketing bullshit.

4-5 hours is excellent, game is geared for replaying on higher difficulties, and that means you'll hit level 30 (End of normal) in 4-5 hours so blasting through with different classes isn't as big of a time sink and you get new skills and runes fairly regularly.

No matter how long or short the game is, Blizztards will find a way to justify it being the perfect length by divine determination of the holy Blizzard. I suppose it's the right length for consoletards though.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

mhc isn't a blizztard

he's just the grandmaster of pre-emptive buyer's remorse

man I wonder how many perfect review scores this will get

 

[sea]

I am sure it depends on how quickly you rush through it. People are trying to go for speed records with this game as soon as it came out- something that wasn't as popular back when D2 came out.

This, pretty much. Didn't people hit level 80 in World of Warcraft's expansion after like 21 hours or something? Don't take 4-5 hours as "standard" final completion time, these guys in all probability were trying to beat the game as quickly as possible, skipping all quests/dialogue/exploration/etc.

 

[Metro]

After about a week we should get a good feel of how much content is legitimately in the game. My hopes aren't high, though.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

I am a bit of a Diablotard though, since Diablo 2 is still the best overall (At least until I sink enough time on D3 to more accurately judge it) of this style of game which I enjoy. Hell, long game length has pissed me off in other games of this genre, like Torchlight 1 and ESPECIALLY Titan Quest which drug so much ass it was painful. As much as I liked TQ I couldn't bring myself to play through it again since for mindless clicking on monsters the backgrounds and enemies didn't change fast enough to be enjoyable to me.