People News Jay Wilson Apologizes for "Fuck That Loser" Comment

[DeepOcean]

All Blizzard games have merged into the same concept with Starcraft being the outlier since people still enjoy RTS. For years WoW has been gravitating towards being Diablo-like in that it's essentially a solo experience except when you want to queue for a dungeon/raid (yes, there's a raid finder now) the Diablo equivalent of boss runs. There is no sense of server community anymore, most guilds are just tools to get the perks that come with them with maybe a couple dozen still interested in 'firsts' because they can hoodwink corporations to sponsor them who in turn hoodwink fans to watch/buy their overpriced crap. It's rife with daily quests, reputation grinds, honor grinds, farming an actual farm, farming dungeon gear, etc. All that in mind it stood to reason Diablo 3 would be more WoW-like than previous iterations. The only real difference between the two games now is the viewing perspective and one is subscription based. Fundamentally they are both Facebook-like loot and achievement grinders.

Yeah, people don't play anymore to experience the atmosphere, exploration, challenging combat and experiment with alot of different builds, Diablo III is exactly like WoW, a repetitive time waster and the only thing left is the endless quest to see who has the highest number, can be fun for a while but at the end you don't feel truly rewarded for playing. I had a feeling of playing a frankenstein, it's like they killed Diablo I and ressurect it and added a few parts from WoW, the result was an abomination, if you think I'm exagerating, you only need to see what they did with the Butcher, from terrifying demon to WoW boss #346464464. I know it's only a dumb ARPG, Diablo I wasn't much different, but it's depressing to see that the developers failed to grasp even basic concepts from Diablo I , they can only create grinder machines now, I guess that working years on WoW has this effect. It's a irony that even Blizzard made a mediocre Diablo clone.

 

[aris]

Yeah, people don't play anymore to experience the atmosphere, exploration, challenging combat and experiment with alot of different builds

If you were even remotely into diablo 2, you'd know that (most) people didn't really play those games in the long run for those qualities either. And that was released well over a decade ago. So if this seems new to you, you are a little late to the party, and haven't understood what diablo is about now and for the last decade, not what it was about 20 years ago.

 

[Average Manatee]

Yeah, people don't play anymore to experience the atmosphere, exploration, challenging combat and experiment with alot of different builds

If you were even remotely into diablo 2, you'd know that (most) people didn't really play those games in the long run for those qualities either. And that was released well over a decade ago. So if this seems new to you, you are a little late to the party, and haven't understood what diablo is about now and for the last decade, not what it was about 20 years ago.

A gaudaost post full of shit. Some things never change.

Atmosphere/exploration- Obviously a game that you've already played 4 times doesn't have much of this left. But they are what draws players in. Diablo 1 had superb atmosphere and Diablo 2 was still better than most other games in this department. Both games have a constant stream of new, generally cool enemies.

Challenging combat and lots of builds - You are right, no one wants this. That's why every popular D2 mod is popular because it lowers item drop rates and lets you grind more, right? No, they add harder combat and better, more unique skills. This is what Diablo players crave, idiot.

 

[Hoaxmetal]

Lol, people still talk with gaudaost.

 

[abija]

Challenging combat and lots of builds - You are right, no one wants this. That's why every popular D2 mod is popular because it lowers item drop rates and lets you grind more, right? No, they add harder combat and better, more unique skills. This is what Diablo players crave, idiot.

Majority of diablo players do NOT want challenging content, D3 proved that more than enough. Actually everything you mention there release D3 already did better than D2.

 

[aris]

Yeah, people don't play anymore to experience the atmosphere, exploration, challenging combat and experiment with alot of different builds

If you were even remotely into diablo 2, you'd know that (most) people didn't really play those games in the long run for those qualities either. And that was released well over a decade ago. So if this seems new to you, you are a little late to the party, and haven't understood what diablo is about now and for the last decade, not what it was about 20 years ago.

A gaudaost post full of shit. Some things never change.

An Average Manatee post full of reading comprehension fails? Guess some things does change.

Atmosphere/exploration- Obviously a game that you've already played 4 times doesn't have much of this left. But they are what draws players in. Diablo 1 had superb atmosphere and Diablo 2 was still better than most other games in this department. Both games have a constant stream of new, generally cool enemies.

So you're basically agreeing with my point. That these qualities does not matter in the long run. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, though saying it at this point is like beating a dead horse which is already a pink pulp: Diablo 3 had a terrible, childish and overly expository story, and the athmosphere was not excellent and not very diabloish (though not cartoonish either). Now those would be important arguments against diablo 3, were it a single player story fag experience such as PS:T, but not against a loot whoring game, which diablo has been for the last decade.

Challenging combat and lots of builds - You are right, no one wants this.

Now where did I say that? I did do a mistake by including this in the quote, as diablo 3 at launch was at least as challenging as diablo 1 and diablo 2. As for builds, Diablo 3 is actually the only game in the series which is flexible with this: Diablo 1 had no builds, it had no skill tree, and you were stuck with whichever skills you picked up along the route, which makes for variations, yes: But random variations. Surely, you could play the game several times and make "builds" that way, but that just reduces it to the system diablo 3 already has. As for diablo 2, it had skill trees, and yes if your primary diet consists of cheetos and blood from virgins and the only light you see during the day is that of a computer screen, you could try out many builds by yourself by making a seperate character for each build, but note that that was not what most people did in the long run: In the long run Diablo 2 was about for most people about finding cutty cutter builds on the internet, leveling and then grinding meph, pindleskin and baal. You're the idiot if you believe something else. Instead of Diablo 3, you have 5 character, each which are free to play around with and try different builds as you unlock them as you want. It has made the character system much more fun, and it feels great to independently discover some of the best builds in the game, which I have done many times during my playthroughs. And also: Diablo 3, at least with the witch doctor, has a lot more viable builds than Diablo 2 ever had with any class.

 

[dibens]

Oh, no, gaudaost is trying to hold an objective view on the the game, fuck that loser.

But he is right, though. Diablo 3 is a much more disappointing game for a casual gamer than it is to a true Diablo grindfag.

And others are right too- the atmosphere and storytelling that made other games so compelling is completely fucked in the ass.

 

[aris]

Diablo 3 is a much more disappointing game for a casual gamer than it is to a true Diablo grindfag.

More like the other way around.

 

[dibens]

Diablo 3 is a much more disappointing game for a casual gamer than it is to a true Diablo grindfag.

More like the other way around.

My casual side loathed the game. My grindfag side got the proper patch.

 

[aris]

Diablo 3 is a much more disappointing game for a casual gamer than it is to a true Diablo grindfag.

More like the other way around.

My casual side loathed the game. My grindfag side got the proper patch.

admittedly, with nephalem levels, or whatever it's called, it does cater to my grinding dark side.

 

[GarfunkeL]

I'm talking about games that he would otherwise buy if it weren't for the fact that he decided not to buy any more blizzard games. That's the only types of games that makes sense to consider when you consider what blizzard would lose from having boycotters. If I, for some arbitrary reason decided after diablo 2, that I would never buy a blizzard game again: They would lose money on WC3, sc2 and D3, but not on WoW, which I have never bought or subscribed to, nor the original game or the expansion packs, as I did not buy them because they did not interest me, not because I was boycotting blizzard. They wouldn't have my money on those games either way.

Now adding the games I bought over the last decade from blizzard which includes WC3+expansion, SC2 and D3 you're up to 220$, which isn't close to 500$.

Holy shit you are retarded!

You're attacking his position where, if HE would boycott Blizzard, they would lose $500 by stating that if YOU would boycott Blizzard, they would only lose $220.

That's probably too difficult sentence for you to comprehend. Let me try again:

BLIZZARD FAN LOVE ALL BLIZZARD GAMES. BUYS THEM ALL. SPENDS $500.

YOU NOT LOVE ALL BLIZZARD GAMES. BUY ONLY SOME. SPEND LESS.

B-FAN AND YOU, THEY DIFFERENT PEOPLE. HE CAN STILL SPEND/NOT SPEND $500 EVEN IF YOU ONLY SPEND/NOT SPEND $220.

Hope that helps.

 

[aris]

NO U! You still don't understand that the post that he made was irrelevant to my original point. Even though I spelled it out, and explained why in that very post you just quoted.

It's not a binary game of not buying ANY of the blizzard games, or buying ALL of them. The only games that makes sense to take into account, are the ones that you explictely choose NOT to buy because you have decided not to buy any more blizzard games in the past, when you consider how much money blizzard loses from such a desicion. Obviously he is trying to punish blizzard by saying such, but I'm saying that it is a mayor fail.

 

[GarfunkeL]

No, you're saying that his decision not to buy any more Blizzard games ever, is meaningless to Blizzard because you, or someone else, might not have been as "valuable" customer as he was. Which is ridiculous. Yes, it's not a binary solution. Yes, he cannot generalize that every disappointed Blizz-fanboy will act the same way. But his decision is still entirely valid, no matter how much money you gave or didn't give. Two different things.

 

[aris]

I'm talking loyalty. More than likely I would have spent $500+ on future Blizzard games but won't now because they are a bad company that doesn't deliver on their products. I'm not a minority, and I feel like multiplying this number by 2 million players is fairly accurate. Keep in mind, I'm no hater, I simply have no reason to ever spend money on their products again. This failure went so far beyond bad game design and into fraud that I no longer feel I can trust them. I don't know about this titan business, but I have to suspect somebody is out to swindle me now. No thanks.

This is what I was responding to. I did not mean that his decision is invalid. I do however contest that his estimate of how much his decision and others who do the same, will impact sales of blizzard, is probably pretty off, and not nearly as damaging as he thinks. And thus him crackling and gleeing because he thinks he brings blizzard shit tons of hurt, is a major fail.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Well, it's easily provable that he has spent $500 or even more on Blizzard products until today. Thus, if he kept remaining a happy customer-sheeple, Blizzard could pump him for far more in the future, which it now cannot. Of course, with millions and millions of customers, he doesn't matter - unless there are enough who think his way. Now that you expanded your initial post, your stance is much clearer and more sensible one: "just because you boycott, doesn't mean many others will, don't be too smug" instead of the initial "$500 is too much, liarliarpantsonfire"-mess.

 

[Kz3r0]

Guys, guys, if Jay"fucking loser" Wilson decided to take another 'opportunity' probably someone at Blizzard should have already quantified the looses due to customers' disaffection.

 

[RK47]

Nice.

Spoiler

 

[Infinitron]

 

[General Maxson]

Nice RK47

I hope that's posted on Diablo 3 forums. Not that it will change anything.

 

[Jaesun]

As long as people still keep buying shitty Blizzard games, they don't give a shit.

 

[aris]

Nice.

Spoiler

Holy shit that banner is stupid on so many levels, that I can't even begin to describe it, but I'll try. First of all, the author displays an astounding ignorance regarding how the item system in Diablo 3 actually works, and is in denial about or also ignorant about how the item system in diablo 2 worked. Yes, primary stat is the most important stat in Diablo 3, just as +all skills was by far the most important stat in Diablo 2. However, unlike Diablo 2 with certain classes (sorc), if you build your character only around that one stat, it's going to suck. It's extremely often worth it to get less on a primary stat, in order to get more on vitality, +all resistance, crit chance, crit damage, life on hit, life leech, attack speed, life regen, all of which are extremely important stats, far more than Diablo 2 ever had. Getting a good character in Diablo 3, consists of hitting the sweet spot of a balance betweeen all those 9 stats. The ONLY skill that is worthwhile on Andariel's visage for a non-melee character, is the 2+ all skills, the rest is just gravy. Period. Just as many skills in Diablo 3 are just gravy.

Secondly, NEWS FLASH: Diablo has been all about power gaming since Diablo 2, of course it's gonna be all about maximizing your DPS. Don't think for a second that Diablo 2, or any other ARPG like it isn't about the same, even though DPS on the weapon isn't written. For casters in Diablo 2, damage wasn't tied to weapons, but rather to skills, giving them an unfair advantage over the melee characters. for those, the weapons was just another armor inventory where you put +all skills items. This was also the reason for why casters were generally much more popular.

Thirdly, all the fucking stupid memes and puns. "Lettuce be cereal", seriously?

All of the things he criticises Diablo 3 for when it comes to the item system also applies to Diablo 2, and more so! So it seems that we must conclude that

if it can be UNIVERSALLY agreed upon
that loot and itemization was more succesful in
Diablo 2 than Diablo 3
then... (notice the discrepancy between the opening statement, and what he actually goes on to say here)
LOOT IN DIABLO II DOESN'T JUST SUCK. IT'S
UNINSPIRED
.
FUNDAMENTALLY
FLAWED

AND QUITE FRANKLY
INSULTING

 

[General Maxson]

Yes, shitcheese, you know best.

 

[RK47]

I wouldn't be too worried.
They're really, really, slow on their development time. So the chance of them flooding the market with mediocre stuff like EA is zilch.
Yes, D3 raked in a ton of cash, but that left a bitter taste in the fanboys' mouth. They've won NO accolades, a first for Blizzard modern games.
So out the loser goes while the development team plan their next move with the expansion pack.

It'd be interesting how they handle it. I'm sure no one's in a hurry to take the lead after Kotick just threw one out to please the fans.

Just think about it: SEVEN years and sections of their fans (not a small part of them) HATED it. That's painful.

 

[IronicNeurotic]

I just hope he didn't transfer to the same project as boyarsky.

 

[Crispy]

I like how gaudaouoususuuouttssst just had to quote the entire thing. Then he took his time and crafted a well-done trolling. Finish up with an edit or two at the end to reveal his imperfections and voila! A star is born!