Am I the only one who feels Diablo 3 isn't that great?

[Frick]

Originally Posted by Phusius

are those pictures above by UFGY20 legit? cause if Diablo 3 could have looked like that... then holy crap... Blizz really did disappoint.

But then people would have complained it's sunny and in a large city.

[Zubasa]

Originally Posted by Frick

But then people would have complained it's sunny and in a large city.

Exactly, the cycle of forum trolls and flame wars never ends
Some people just never learns that what makes a good game for them is subjective.

[techtard]

I don't care for D3 either, but I have nothing against the game. I just don't find click-fests fun anymore.

[MatTheCat]

Originally Posted by Phusius

Just seems kind of bland to me. Just wondering I am alone in this.

It getting a lot of hate over at metacritic and having read what the haters have to say, I aint gonna touch it.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/di...i/user-reviews

Pay2Win

Always on DRM

Overpriced

Not being able to play due to Activision servers being down.

Reported bland gameplay.

[INSTG8R]

Originally Posted by techtard

I don't care for D3 either, but I have nothing against the game. I just don't find click-fests fun anymore.

Feel pretty much the same. Looks to me like an overpriced game that could be played on Facebook. That is the basis of most games on FB just alot of clicking.

[random]

Originally Posted by INSTG8R

Feel pretty much the same. Looks to me like an overpriced game that could be played on Facebook. That is the basis of most games on FB just alot of clicking.

I think Diablo III has got the CoD syndrome, activision could be blamed. I am not really hyped for this game at all as I've had mixed feelings ever since I saw the graphics (looks like WoW) and heard the fact that the original Diablo team had nothing to do with this game, for me graphics make up alot of a game especially when I'm playing on a high end system, there is just no excuse for pixelated mush in PC games anymore, it tends to really ruin the atmosphere for me.

Anyway I will wait for some more user reviews and see how people like it, back to playing TERA and waiting for GW2/Torchlight 2 for me :P.

[AsRock]

Originally Posted by Inceptor

Maybe that's just a sign of the times. The original game was released at the height of X-files fame, and the semi-normalness of things weird and fringe. The 'darkness' of the late nineties, before the turn of the millennium.
There's been a lot of backlash from 'concerned citizens' regarding gratuitous gore and violence, in the last handful of years. Especially now that game graphics are so much more real looking.

So by time Diablo 6 is out it be more like pretty little ponys's then huh. If your doing a M rated game on such a theme do it right and make it one. And thinking about it even cains voice sounded worse in D3 than D2

Only reason a game should be more cartoon like is they are either strapped for cash publisher is a a hole or their to bone idle to do it right.

And it's time we got those shops who sell 2 kids these type of games and fined those parents who buy such games for their kids.

[Frick]

I don't really understand the hate on the cartonnish graphics. It's been Blizzards thing for many years now, it's an "accept it or beat it" scenario imo. I only played the beta but it felt pretty good. It wasn't as cartoony as Warcraft but not like the first game either.

[random]

Originally Posted by Frick

I don't really understand the hate on the cartonnish graphics. It's been Blizzards thing for many years now, it's an "accept it or beat it" scenario imo. I only played the beta but it felt pretty good. It wasn't as cartoony as Warcraft but not like the first game either.

It was never a thing for Diablo or Starcraft. Blizzard's cartoony graphics was a Warcraft thing, now it's like all their games are run by one team and it does not one bit suit Diablo.

[1Kurgan1]

Originally Posted by NC37

Blizzcon 10 was all about D3. Just insane how overly hyped it was when I was there. Was a sign of how poor Cataclysm would be. A sign I should have heeded. But every time I saw the shots of D3 or the beta being played, it just did not impress me. Blizz doesn't seem to have the same quality as they used to. At least to me.

I would agree on Torchlight, although I never liked the controls of the first game. Nor the insane amount of loot drops. Never did finish it. Guess I better before Torch 2 comes out. I do plan to buy it for sure. There is good fun to be had in Torchlight.

I think it's funny you say that, having played WoW since release, Cata was the Expansion that me and most others I know thought was the best. I hated Outlands scenery for the most part, and didn't really like the dungeons/raids. WotLK was too easy, locations were ok. Cata actually made noobs cry about dungeon difficulty (was nice to see that again), and had some epic locations.

Originally Posted by techtard

I don't care for D3 either, but I have nothing against the game. I just don't find click-fests fun anymore.

Then don't click so much. You can hold down the mouse to move and hold down the mouse to attack. Diablo players spam mouse clicks for nothing, can casually play and just hold down that left mouse button.

Originally Posted by random

It was never a thing for Diablo or Starcraft. Blizzard's cartoony graphics was a Warcraft thing, now it's like all their games are run by one team and it does not one bit suit Diablo.

I do agree it's a bit too cartoony for my tastes. But I also enjoy the settings far more than I ever did D2. I would like to see some more detail though. Either way, so far I'm having fun with it.

Originally Posted by remixedcat

badass architecture in the pics above in what it could have been

About 99% sure those aren't any sort of Diablo screens. That looks like Roman type architecture, reminds me of Titan Quest. Far Far too bright for me ever to want to see Diablo like that. Whatever that is it looks aged, high detail for it's age, but still aged.

**EDIT**
Close up of those screens, pretty sure thats a D2 mod.

[Captain.Abrecan]

Originally Posted by Frick

I don't really understand the hate on the cartonnish graphics. It's been Blizzards thing for many years now, it's an "accept it or beat it" scenario imo. I only played the beta but it felt pretty good. It wasn't as cartoony as Warcraft but not like the first game either.

The hate happens because their art department used to be top-notch:
http://i.imgur.com/5B2CW.jpg

The goldskin armor was based off of this armor (attached). It is Henry the VII personal suit. Look at the Diablo 2 armor in any online item list. It looks real, like it came from medieval times in real human history. The weapons are great too.
http://diablo.wikia.com/wiki/List_of...or_(Diablo_II)

Look at the armor and weapons we see in D3. It looks childish. They are retarded. The WoW design team has made it, so there is more stuff that looks childish along with skills/spells that are too showy. They don't necessarily help make the fighting more dynamic or interesting, it is just eye-candy. The spells are moving away from the most martially effective stuff, like raw elemental damage, into stuff that makes a special effect so the WoW players go "Oooh! Shiny!".

The characters look like little cartoon people right out of some anime design studio. And all the kids love it.

It does look like a wow clone. The stone railings and caves are generic WoW set pieces. There is nothing in it to indicate what society the caves belong to, what era/act/tribe/civilization/wizard group. There is no architectural detail to them. There is nothing. They look exactly like all the other caves and catacombs in WoW. They are not memorable, or have any tactile feel because of this. There is no way you can replace the kind of visceral emotional attachment that dungeons like 'The Hole' or "The Spider Cavern' & 'The Maggot Lair' add to the gameplay experience. It is lost. Forever.

In Diablo 2, the details for each environment sprite object were carefully designed to be part of a large, fully-fledged and harmoniously tuned back-story that rivals the complexity of middle-earth. The catacombs in the graveyard after defeating Blood Raven are obviously man made, with a neo-christian gothic construction influence that flows from the ruined buildings, the ruined forts, corrupted sites, the base camp, catacombs and barracks of The Sisters of The Sightless Eye.

Whew. *clears throat* When you make it to Andariel, and into Act 2, you realize that the design team has painstakingly crafted what looks like a complete nation for you to play through in the second act as well, with it's own history, art style, character development complexities (unique to the eastern province social theory), and unique plot devices that don't get ripped off elsewhere in the game (nice).

You don't get that with stuff from Blizzard (South). It all looks the same, plays the same, lacks cultural significance, fails to instill emotion, is not memorable, feels hallow even withstanding a well-stocked rewards system. They suck at their job. They should be ashamed of themselves. Good thing there are enough kids who somehow think they are the largest gaming demographic in town, because the adults know better than to get lost in shitty development title like WoW.

The only thing I can compare the scale of what-the-f*ckery that is going on here, is to reference the loss of quality between Morrowind and Oblivion. It is the same problem we are experiencing here, and it has been discussed at length elsewhere.

The game world in D2 was,what can I call it, ... Psychologically Engineered. Much like the claustrophobic interiors of Doom 3, and the boundless brushed nickel towers and walls of Forerunner architecture in the Halo Universe. It was designed by a mastermind, you can't just get a bachelor's in game design at a community college and replicate that kind of experience and sheer devotion. This game was doomed from the start, once you make that realization, and then the one involving the fact that the game will still set sales records regardless.

[D007]

Originally Posted by Phusius

That is not my main complaint Zub, I never played Diablo 1 or 2, and I just didn't realize all there was to it was left clicking with your primary attack 99% of the time. Yeah, I know it would get complicated later on, but this game just isn't for everyone. I really don't see it beating SC2 in sales either, we will see. We know it won't even match WoW, I don't think anything ever will reach that 15 million or w.e mark ever again.

At level 12 how many abilities do you even have to justify this post? You speak about the game lacking in diversity but you haven't even barely passed the first act.. That's like me hopping into oblivion, getting past the first dragon and saying, ok the game's done, meh that was short, let me go complain..

[Kreij]

Here's a review from a metacritic user ...

SugarRaichu

May 15, 2012

2

the worst first person shooter I've ever played cant even log in, and i even stood in line for at least two hours to pay for this dont waste your money BLIZZARD IS FINISHED

He's probably right about it not being a very good 1st person shooter. lol

[TheMailMan78]

I found Diablo 3 to be the worst NASCAR simulator ever.

[Lionheart]

This just in Error 37......

[D007]

Man I'm gonna be pissed if it's as bad as half of you are making it sound..
Been waiting for this game for a long time. It can't be that bad.. I bet it's great and people just aren't getting deep enough into it.

Yes, that's what she said..

[TheMailMan78]

I knew.....KNEW I should have waited for reviews.

[Kreij]

I want to play it despite what other people think as it looks fun. I'll make my own assment.
I'm not willing to shell out $60 for it, though.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

I knew.....KNEW I should have waited for reviews.

LULz, gotta pull the emo into everytring, eh?





They had a public BETA so peopel could check it out beforehand. I did, and enjoyed it. It was Diablo II, with slightly newer graphics, and such an easy-to-use interface that I played through from start to finish, the whole while using a tablet; no mouse, no keyboard.

Diablo has always been a "click-fest", and using the tablet makes it a "tap-fest". Today I'm going to play what I think should be a far more complex character...we'll see if I need the keyboard, or if the tablet will continue to be enough.


I wasn't really expecting much...dungeon crawls with a friend or two, and that's about it. I know I'll get it...

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

LULz, gotta pull the emo into everytring, eh?





They had a public BETA so peopel could check it out beforehand. I did, and enjoyed it. It was Diablo II, with slightly newer graphics, and such an easy-to-use interface that I played through from start to finish, the whole while using a tablet; no mouse, no keyboard.

Diablo has always been a "click-fest", and using the tablet makes it a "tap-fest". Today I'm going to play what I think should be a far more complex character...we'll see if I need the keyboard, or if the tablet will continue to be enough.


I wasn't really expecting much...dungeon crawls with a friend or two, and that's about it. I know I'll get it...

Well I haven't even played it yet so my hopes are still high. I remember when BF3 came out and it had TONS of negative reviews. Now I got like 150 hours in BF3 I can safety say those reviewers were full of S@IT. I also have another advantage most don't. I never played the originals. EVER. So I come into this game without any bias and curious expectations.

[D007]

I just read a review that said the game is only like 8- hours long.
Man they are destroying this game on Metacritic.. XD

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by D007

I just read a review that said the game is only like 8- hours long.
Man they are destroying this game on Metacritic.. XD

One guy beat it in 6 hours......so he claims.

[Captain.Abrecan]

There are reviews on metacritic saying that metacritic is deleting bad reviews. Doesn't surprise me.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/di...i/user-reviews

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Well I haven't even played it yet so my hopes are still high. I remember when BF3 came out and it had TONS of negative reviews. Now I got like 150 hours in BF3 I can safety say those reviewers were full of S@IT. I also have another advantage most don't. I never played the originals. EVER. So I come into this game without any bias and curious expectations.

Indeed, playing games after the problems get patched is usually a better experience.

[Kreij]

Originally Posted by Captain.Abrecan

Indeed, playing games after the problems get patched is usually a better experience.

Yes, a lot of the metacritic reviews are complaining about connection problems (which will get sorted out at some point).

[D007]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

One guy beat it in 6 hours......so he claims.

It could just be like a lot of RPG's. You can go all balls to the wall and beat the main story in no time, or you can spend days, weeks, or even months at it..

I could beat any resident evil game in 4-6 hours.. Or I could actually enjoy it for twice that..
But like final fantasy I could beat in a day as well. Could play that for potentially over a hundred hours, if you did all the side quests.

I hope thats the case.