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

[Surf Solar]

Some stuff that is fucking annoying to me:

Also, the game feels soooo slow compared to Diablo 2.. I don't fucking care about your fancy new animations, just speed them the fuck up.
The shitty cartoony art style.. What the fuck were they thinking. The UI elements look nice atleast, great level of detail - even though there are lots of those fucking windows on main UI that I dont want (quest progress window, the shitty global chat window). What's with all those "dialogues"? Were they really needed? No Skilltrees, wtf. What the hell happened with town portals? Too complicated? Then those cooldowns everywhere, what the hell.

Well, good that I could test this game with a guest pass, I am now going back to a recently started playthrough of Diablo II - atleast this feels like Diablo, not World of Warcraft.

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

If Diablo III were a girl.

 

[ScottishMartialArts]

Also, the game feels soooo slow compared to Diablo 2.. I don't fucking care about your fancy new animations, just speed them the fuck up.

What the hell happened with town portals? Too complicated? Then those cooldowns everywhere, what the hell.

The game speeds up substantially in Nightmare. If you encounter a champion group with the Fast attribute, then you better be, well, fast if you want to survive. And town portals are in. You learn the ability at the end of The Shattered Crown quest in Act I Normal. As for cooldowns, only a handful of abilities are cooldown limited; most are resource limited.

 

[Sceptic]

Note that my description is pretty darn specific and those specifics fit both films.

No it doesn't, and that's the problem. "The whole point of Solaris is that the Ocean is not an insidious force, it's completely alien and beyond human comprehension. There's not even conclusive evidence that it's alive or sentient in any meaningful way." That's the theme of Solaris the movie (haven't read the novel yet). To claim it's the same pretty darn specific plot as a horror movie rape demon is... I don't know, my reaction if another poster had said would've been "have you even seen the movie?"

 

[evdk]

Just finished the game on Normal with my Witch Doctor. Died only a few times, mostly when I stopped giving a fuck a tried to wade in just for fun. Otherwise the only fight that gave me significant trouble was the boss fight at the end of Act II with Belial, mostly because of the retarded Dance Dance Diablo mechanics. Whoever designed that little gem ought to be drawn and quartered. When I died in the fight due to lag for the second time I almost put my fist through my laptop screen. Fuck that. Diablo himself was piss easy and a little boring in fact, because I spent most of that fight running away from him, waiting for my cooldowns to reset.

EDIT: The other moronic thing about the Belial fight is that every time he kills you, you have to suffer through the same two cut scenes and two warm up fights again. And again. Seriously, who thought this was a good idea?

 

[shihonage]

Note that my description is pretty darn specific and those specifics fit both films.

No it doesn't, and that's the problem. "The whole point of Solaris is that the Ocean is not an insidious force, it's completely alien and beyond human comprehension. There's not even conclusive evidence that it's alive or sentient in any meaningful way." That's the theme of Solaris the movie (haven't read the novel yet). To claim it's the same pretty darn specific plot as a horror movie rape demon is... I don't know, my reaction if another poster had said would've been "have you even seen the movie?"

Yeah, I don't know why I wrote "films". I was comparing the novel to "Event Horizon". The key similarities, accurately summarized in my little plot outline, are way beyond coincidental, which proves my point that Event Horizon used Solaris as base material.

My point never was that Solaris IS Event Horizon, so I'd appreciate it if people would going into retarded gotcha internet mode and pretending like I equated one to another.

The larger claim that I made is that Event Horizon is actually more "Solaris" compared to the novel than both films, which are pretentious awfulness.

Tarkovsky's film was a complete disaster, with 10-minute freeway driving scene (just a camera mounted on a car), minutes of looking at someone sleeping, or something like a 5-minute shot of a tree.

Soderberg's film was not based on the novel, but on an already retarded abomination conjured up by Tarkovsky. With Clooney's butt nudity in it.

Event Horizon used Solaris as base, capitalized on the horror element, which was lurking beneath the surface of the novel, made it bold and obvious, and ignored anything with remote semblance of depth. But it was a good horror flick - a nice accomplishment for its genre. It actually worked, which cannot be said for either "Solaris" films. They aimed to be deep, but instead made me cringe and laugh.

A true Solaris film has not been made thus far. I dare say that even "Moon" had more "Solaris" in it (from the non-horror angle) and either Solaris films. The tragedy of an incomplete human replica realizing its limitations - a memorable subplot from the novel.

 

[felipepepe]

Some stuff that is fucking annoying to me.

To be fair, the stats do make a HUGE difference as the game goes on...by Act 4 you'll be finding +80 stats itens, and giving your mage/wdoctor inteligence seems a very important aspect of selecting gear.

 

[circ]

ITT: getting assraped by a massive spiked dildo, and learning to like it, to the point of making up excuses for why your asshole looks like a cluster bomb went off in it.

 

[Kane]

ITT: getting assraped by a massive spiked dildo, and learning to like it, to the point of making up excuses for why your asshole looks like a cluster bomb went off in it.

it's chic.

 

[Gragt]

No, there is nothing it adds. All you have described is the fact that the server host can change hands when the original host leaves, which is something that dozens of games implement and would be trivial to implement in D2.

Which dozens of games?

 

[Average Manatee]

No, there is nothing it adds. All you have described is the fact that the server host can change hands when the original host leaves, which is something that dozens of games implement and would be trivial to implement in D2.

Which dozens of games?

From what I know the majority of console games, which almost never use dedicated servers but P2P networking. Turns out that if consoletard matches ended as soon as the host got butthurt most games would last about 30 seconds. In fact this is even harder than what Blizzard has to do, since the physical location of the host doesn't change with Blizzard's method (it's always Blizzard hosting instead of a changing player). All they do is keep the server session open and reassign who has control.

You could also say L4D has the same system since you randomly get put on a server when you start a new game and it stays open until everyone leaves. The only difference is that kicking people or preventing others from joining is done by vote instead of by the designated host. I'm sure there are other relevant PC examples but my in depth knowledge of multiplayer games is limited to about 6 or so games post-2005.

 

[Gragt]

I can see it is the same principle but that would apply mainly to multiplayer matches, and if you change hosts, the game freezes until the next host keeps up with things. Also there's the reality that many people have a bad connection when it comes to hosting — like yours truly — and the game would become unplyable for others if they are chosen. What Blizzard system adds is that possibility to turn a solo game into multiplayer and back to solo, all seamlessly and with limited latency since the host is a Blizzard server. This adds quite a bit of comfort.

 

[circ]

Draconian DRM? THINK AGAIN! It's seamless and comfortable, with the consumer in mind, always!

 

[Average Manatee]

I can see it is the same principle but that would apply mainly to multiplayer matches, and if you change hosts, the game freezes until the next host keeps up with things. Also there's the reality that many people have a bad connection when it comes to hosting — like yours truly — and the game would become unplyable for others if they are chosen. What Blizzard system adds is that possibility to turn a solo game into multiplayer and back to solo, all seamlessly and with limited latency since the host is a Blizzard server. This adds quite a bit of comfort.

Changing host doesn't take much time, they have all the relevant information ready and simply become a source instead of a destination. Connection speed is obviously taken into account when choosing who to become the new host. Even if this is a problem there is no reason to like Blizzard's solution instead of L4D's, which offers all of the same advantages along with true no-lag singleplayer, mod support, additional level support, private servers, etc. (hail the god emperor gaben)

 

[Gragt]

Changing host doesn't take much time, they have all the relevant information ready and simply become a source instead of a destination. Connection speed is obviously taken into account when choosing who to become the new host. Even if this is a problem there is no reason to like Blizzard's solution instead of L4D's, which offers all of the same advantages along with true no-lag singleplayer, mod support, additional level support, private servers, etc. (hail the god emperor gaben)

It may not take much time, but it still takes time. If this happens when you are in the middle of an action that requires timing and precision, it is likely that you'll defer success, whether the switch takes 5 or 30 seconds. Connection speed should be taken into account when choosing a new host but we're still talking of home computers and not servers, so if the game decides to pick someone who doesn't have a good connection for hosting, and that happens, you'll see everyone leaving the game soon enough. It is my preference to play on something reliable like a dedicated server than P2P multiplayer, but to each his own.

I agreed before that giving a real offline solo mode wouldn't be a bad thing, with the caveat that you can't use these characters for playing online or participate in anything else. Same with mod support for that solo mode, even if I'm not a fan of mods. That said it can't be denied that D3's model is an enjoyable one for the reasons I gave above, and it does bring advantages compared to other "always online" solutions. In a way, forcing you to be online can make you realise that you might as well play with others, which is probably something I wouldn't have considered if an offline solo mode was available.

I'm not quite sure L4D is relevant here. The single player is dull as it is a game thoroughly designed for multiplayer, so there is little incentive to use this option except to test and explore things; the scale is smaller with each campaign taking from 20 minutes to 1 hour to complete, after which the game ends; there is no character persistence; etc. I'm also curious how much Steam would like to implement an "always online" system like Blizzard. They were reviled a few years ago when Steam launched yet see how well established they are now.

 

[Average Manatee]

It may not take much time, but it still takes time. If this happens when you are in the middle of an action that requires timing and precision, it is likely that you'll defer success, whether the switch takes 5 or 30 seconds. Connection speed should be taken into account when choosing a new host but we're still talking of home computers and not servers, so if the game decides to pick someone who doesn't have a good connection for hosting, and that happens, you'll see everyone leaving the game soon enough. It is my preference to play on something reliable like a dedicated server than P2P multiplayer, but to each his own.

Which is why I mentioned L4D, which has none of these potential problems.

I agreed before that giving a real offline solo mode wouldn't be a bad thing, with the caveat that you can't use these characters for playing online or participate in anything else. Same with mod support for that solo mode, even if I'm not a fan of mods. That said it can't be denied that D3's model is an enjoyable one for the reasons I gave above, and it does bring advantages compared to other "always online" solutions. In a way, forcing you to be online can make you realise that you might as well play with others, which is probably something I wouldn't have considered if an offline solo mode was available.

Diablo 2 already solved this problem. Open battlenet supported singleplayer/multiplayer/mods, closed battlenet supported tightly controlled legit play. You could start a single player character and bring them right into open battlenet, then take them into a mod (assuming the mod was compatible, most weren't of course).

I'm not quite sure L4D is relevant here. The single player is dull as it is a game thoroughly designed for multiplayer, so there is little incentive to use this option except to test and explore things; the scale is smaller with each campaign taking from 20 minutes to 1 hour to complete, after which the game ends; there is no character persistence; etc. I'm also curious how much Steam would like to implement an "always online" system like Blizzard. They were reviled a few years ago when Steam launched yet see how well established they are now.

None of those points add or subtract anything from the fact that if D3 used L4D's system, or just D2's system with games staying open between players, the game would be unconditionally improved.

 

[Black]

closed battlenet supported tightly controlled legit play.

 

[DraQ]

That's a summary I'd expect from TvTropes. The whole point of Solaris is that the Ocean is not an insidious force, it's completely alien and beyond human comprehension. There's not even conclusive evidence that it's alive or sentient in any meaningful way. Human interaction with the truly alien is the primary theme of the novel, and also a meta-commentary on popular sci-fi depictions of aliens and alien worlds. Meanwhile, EH has a rape demon from hell who wants to torture people for fun. Not even remotely close.

This.

Of course, shoddybugger's "adaptation" completely fails to capture that, so it can be meaningfully compared with EH and similar crap.

As for me it's ok, I always payed for every game, even shitty "Oblivion" or "Mass Effect 2" (last game that I'll buy from Bioware ever). Well fuck you: we're having fun.

It takes a rather huge fucking moron to knowingly contribute to the decline *AND* be proud of it.

And, for the record, I pay for the games I know are good or even good for what they are (Skyrim, although I would probably not buy it if the news of Obsidian screw-over arrived 2 days earlier). I even prefer to avoid pirating them if I can learn enough of them using different channels, to avoid possible hassles with cracks, patches, incompatibility and installing the same shit twice if it's good enough to warrant purchase.

Also, for the record - it's "paid" you fucking imbecile.

All in all:

The thing is that D3 can at least justify it's "always online" requirement by making the game easier to use

Well, not really, D2 got this part right:

You had single/non-BN multi/open BN as offline mode and closed BN with full benefits of always online. It even had built-in patcher.

However, to deny that Event Horizon used Solaris as base, is just stupid.

I guess you could find quite a few really good and really close Sci-Fi inspirations in ME franchise.

Does it change anything about ME creators completely failing to grasp what made the originals tick?

 

[Average Manatee]

closed battlenet supported tightly controlled legit play.

To the same standard that D3 has, because D3 is nothing but forced closed battlenet with Blizzard-backed item selling.

 

[Black]

Same standard? D3 already has dupes, maphacks, chicken hacks, pickits and so on?

 

[Gragt]

Which is why I mentioned L4D, which has none of these potential problems.

Which is why I said the two games are very different in structure.

Diablo 2 already solved this problem. Open battlenet supported singleplayer/multiplayer/mods, closed battlenet supported tightly controlled legit play. You could start a single player character and bring them right into open battlenet, then take them into a mod (assuming the mod was compatible, most weren't of course).

Well, not really, D2 got this part right:

You had single/non-BN multi/open BN as offline mode and closed BN with full benefits of always online. It even had built-in patcher.

No deying it would have been nice to have an open B.net kind of thing for those who prefer it. But that still doesn't touch my original point much, or does it?

None of those points add or subtract anything from the fact that if D3 used L4D's system, or just D2's system with games staying open between players, the game would be unconditionally improved.

But what unconditional improvements are you talking about? Mod support would be nice for those who want it, but it's hardly mandatory. Playing offline and alone for those who prefer it would be nice too — even if Diablo 2 is a bore when played alone but to each his own.

 

[circ]

closed battlenet supported tightly controlled legit play.

You confuse the shit out of me Black. You're one of the most vocal and acerbic critics of other games, but when the wheel stops on Blizzard and Diablo 3 specifically, you completely ignore faults that were major faults in other games and sing its praises.

 

[MetalCraze]

Bros, fuck this Diablo 3 piece of shit.

Play Torchlight 2 if you want a real D2 sequel.

 

[General Maxson]

Bros, fuck this Diablo 3 piece of shit.

Play Torchlight 2 if you want a real D2 sequel.

How good is randomization there?

 

[Black]

closed battlenet supported tightly controlled legit play.

You confuse the shit out of me Black. You're one of the most vocal and acerbic critics of other games, but when the wheel stops on Blizzard and Diablo 3 specifically, you completely ignore faults that were major faults in other games and sing its praises.

I'm not ignoring the flaws. I'm with agreement with Zed (one of them at least) on D3- Blizzard's policies are shit (always online etc) but the game itself is very good.