I finally got to play some Diablo 3

[GoaThief]

I don't understand the complaints regarding Diablo 3 being too simple and button mashy... my most vivid memories of playing the original Diablo are repeated clickings of the left mouse button and collecting loot. It was a very simple game, was it not? Fun and addictive, but simple.

Why should the third be any different?

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I don't understand the complaints regarding Diablo 3 being too simple and button mashy... my most vivid memories of playing the original Diablo are repeated clickings of the left mouse button and collecting loot. It was a very simple game, was it not? Fun and addictive, but simple.

Why should the third be any different?

Right, I am not really faulting it for that. The thing is, with the original Diablo games, there was usually a lot of depth in how you built the character that worked around those simple clicks. In this game, there is none, on top of that, the game has no challenge at all. A bunch of clicking and hack and slash is fine, but you need some kind of challenge to make it worth playing. Diablo 3 is just so shallow and so stupidly easy that you could close your eyes and keep going. Everything feels pointless because its so easy.
Granted I only got to play on normal, but even normal on Diablo 2 wasn't THAT easy. A lot of games boil down to just "clicking a lot" if you break them down, but the systems built around those clicks matter a lot. Diablo 3's are very poor.

 

[Darkmantle]

Sad. After the crap that was the Starcraft 2 campaign, I don't think I'm going to buy any more Blizzard games for a while. I'd love to test D3 and see if I like it at all, because maybe I'll find it fun, but honestly it sounds rather bad.

If they're trying to make it God of War -esq then Blizzard can go fuck themselves. GoW 3 (only one I've played) was not a very good game to me.

All that said, I only know a little of D3 and so I still maintain some hope that it will pull through.

I hear this all the time, so I must ask, why do you consider SC2s campaign to be crap?

OT: I'm probably still going to buy it, I'm a big fan of blizz and I have yet to be disappointed yet

I know this was directed at the other poster but since I also had some issues with the Sc2 campaign I thought I'd answer. It was mostly for me that it butchered a lot of the lore and my favorite characters. Every mission also revolved around gimmicks and more action oriented content. There really wasn't any missions of building a base and going after the CPU, your standard RTS fare. Starcraft 2 basically plays more like a real time action game.
Now don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed the campaign enough to get every achievement in it so in many ways, the gameplay is way superior to the first game. That is just why I think a lot of people don't care for it.

while I concede on the butchering some characters part [the overmind and tassadar shall never recover] I prefer the gimmick a mission style, I mean if I wanted to just play standard, I would set up a vsAI custom game, no reason to just play standard in the main story.

although some people have gone way too far, I met one guy on the sc2 forums that was convinced that mengsk was a tragic hero and raynor a murderous butcher, I think he had a law and order complex

I mostly agree about the gimmicky missions. They were more interesting to play. The story was very weak though. I just hate the whole "chosen one to defeat the incoming evil" aspect. I sorta liked it better when it was just a lot of factions against each other. It was enough that I won't be buying the next game to continue the story, but I still enjoyed the first one for what it was.

A lot of people had problems with the prophesy, but I disagree. that was one of the themes of the story, prophesy vs freewill, with jimmy ultimately concluding that free will is true not prophesy, even the main character calls bullshit on the prophesy! you only get to hear that convo if u stuck with tosh and continued to talk with him though, so maybe a lot of people missed it.

EDIT: I do hope they don't just pull a WC3 on us and have all 3 races team up against the xelnaga :/

If Raynor was calling bullshit on prophecy then why did he suddenly decide to spare Kerrigan? He did it because he was told by Zeratul that without Kerrigan, everyone is doomed. At the end of Brood War, Raynor basically tells Kerrigan that he is going to be the one to kill her.
I just can't stand this redemption of Kerrigan bullshit. The ***** deserves to die, stop painting her as a hero who was just enslaved to the Zerg. That was my biggest gripe. If at the end of SC2, they put a bullet in Kerrigan's head, I woulda given the game a 500 out of 10 just for having epic balls.

he did it mostly because he wanted to. another plot point was establishing, at least in jimmy's head, the the queen of blades and sarah are different people in the same bodies, he said he was going to kill the QoB, and he did with the artifact, he also managed to save sarah, win/win I guess.

and yeah, we are waaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyy off topic. so diablo 3? fun shit? I'm probably still going to get it eventually

EDIT: Looks like I should start a thread on this subject

 

[Cowabungaa]

Exclusive or not, it's still an unfair advantage when you don't have to work for anything in the game, never mind the economical repercussions of this whole shabang.

Not in terms of gameplay. When two players are going to PvP together with the same items, and one person bought them with real money and the other looted them, their battle won't be affected. That's a fundamental difference with STO.

Actually, one might be able to argue that the legitimate player would have an advantage, him having combat experience and stuff. But that's pushing it too. Point is, in Diablo 3 free players and auction house buyers will have access to the same content and so neither of them can become more powerful than the other.

I have a feeling that even if Blizzard did sell items, which I'm 90% sure they will later on, just as many people would jump to their defense and say it's a-ok. Just like they did with all the ridiculously priced character transfers, pets, mounts and all that stuff.

I still don't see an issue with that, except that they've overpriced, but fundamentally I'm not opposed to it at all. Why? They're all, basically, cosmetic changes that have little effect on gameplay. I would rage when they would sell a set of armor that's superior to anything you can get out of a raid.

 

[Arakasi]

The only reason I was ever compelled to play Diablo II was the cut scenes with bits of story.
Other then that, it was a big ol' grind sandwich.

Oh, and building characters is always fun, until you fuck it up and realise there is no way to reverse it, resulting in some monstrosity you have to fluke the final boss battle with.

 

[Fishyash]

These are very fair points.

The problem with removing attribute customization is that you're limiting the potential for off-the-wall builds. Barbarians can only play one way now. Sorceress can only be a sorceress.

My bear-sorc in D2 wouldn't have been viable without being able to pump dexterity. Zealadins, Hammerdins, and Auradins wouldn't have been possible. Trapsins and Kicksins? Without customizing your attributes, every class will be the same, look the same, and play the same, and that's boring.

They've killed off one of the best aspects of a new Diablo game, and that's experiencing the different builds possible with each character.

Okay, there's a very good reason why I want customization in my diablo games, it's because I want to play the games my way, if I want to be a bone spear throwing necromancer, I put points into energy, If I don't care about how much I get hit or just run from the fights until my mana refills I won't put anything into dexterity, sorry to break it to blizzard, but people don't play the same way as everyone else, and no, I don't do that for every single character I make, because I make different characters to try different playing styles.

However if they feel that the customizable stat system is going to be terrible (honestly, it wasn't very good in diablo 2), I am not gonna go against the idea that they will scrap it.

Your skill tree and your gear defined the character more than your stats did. The stats were a matter of how much you had to put into strength and dex before going full on vitality. Stats are staying on gear, and to my knowlege you can set a "skill build" a la guild wars. Gear and your skill set will still define your character, although unfortunately not to the degree of diablo 2.

IMO, it got in the way. On classic people were valuing items with +strength, +dexterity and -requirements (as well as other useful stats like +life, hitstun reduction and resistances) so they could pump as much stats into vitality as possible.

I didn't realise hammerdins don't use the regular stat layout. Not even on LoD, which I haven't played, but heard about hammerdins using the regular stat layout (as much into vitality as possible while being able to wear gear and get max block), has this been recent, an old patch, something I missed?.

Stats like strength, dex, and maybe energy were more important in gear than as you level up. The stat system failed at what it was supposed to do, and blizzard did not like the direction it went.

All in all, I would have preferred it if they attempted to improve the stat system instead of just canning it altogether, but I am not gonna miss it if it was going to be equal or worse than D2's stat system.

 

[Simeon Ivanov]

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

I loved the shit out of Diablo I and II but it's been clear for a while now that they were going to fuck this up.

When everyone was babbling their mouths off over the cartoony graphics, I was grinding my teeth over just one thing and that was enough for me:

You can't pause?
You can't fucking pause?!
What, people suddenly don't have bladders anymore?

Oh wow, that made my day. Hats of to you good sir!

OT: Well, I always feared this would be the end result ... At least Blizzard won't mess up Warcraft with Warcraft IV ... Oh dear, I just jinxed it didn't I?

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

Sad. After the crap that was the Starcraft 2 campaign, I don't think I'm going to buy any more Blizzard games for a while. I'd love to test D3 and see if I like it at all, because maybe I'll find it fun, but honestly it sounds rather bad.

If they're trying to make it God of War -esq then Blizzard can go fuck themselves. GoW 3 (only one I've played) was not a very good game to me.

All that said, I only know a little of D3 and so I still maintain some hope that it will pull through.

I hear this all the time, so I must ask, why do you consider SC2s campaign to be crap?

OT: I'm probably still going to buy it, I'm a big fan of blizz and I have yet to be disappointed yet

I know this was directed at the other poster but since I also had some issues with the Sc2 campaign I thought I'd answer. It was mostly for me that it butchered a lot of the lore and my favorite characters. Every mission also revolved around gimmicks and more action oriented content. There really wasn't any missions of building a base and going after the CPU, your standard RTS fare. Starcraft 2 basically plays more like a real time action game.
Now don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed the campaign enough to get every achievement in it so in many ways, the gameplay is way superior to the first game. That is just why I think a lot of people don't care for it.

while I concede on the butchering some characters part [the overmind and tassadar shall never recover] I prefer the gimmick a mission style, I mean if I wanted to just play standard, I would set up a vsAI custom game, no reason to just play standard in the main story.

although some people have gone way too far, I met one guy on the sc2 forums that was convinced that mengsk was a tragic hero and raynor a murderous butcher, I think he had a law and order complex

I mostly agree about the gimmicky missions. They were more interesting to play. The story was very weak though. I just hate the whole "chosen one to defeat the incoming evil" aspect. I sorta liked it better when it was just a lot of factions against each other. It was enough that I won't be buying the next game to continue the story, but I still enjoyed the first one for what it was.

A lot of people had problems with the prophesy, but I disagree. that was one of the themes of the story, prophesy vs freewill, with jimmy ultimately concluding that free will is true not prophesy, even the main character calls bullshit on the prophesy! you only get to hear that convo if u stuck with tosh and continued to talk with him though, so maybe a lot of people missed it.

EDIT: I do hope they don't just pull a WC3 on us and have all 3 races team up against the xelnaga :/

If Raynor was calling bullshit on prophecy then why did he suddenly decide to spare Kerrigan? He did it because he was told by Zeratul that without Kerrigan, everyone is doomed. At the end of Brood War, Raynor basically tells Kerrigan that he is going to be the one to kill her.
I just can't stand this redemption of Kerrigan bullshit. The ***** deserves to die, stop painting her as a hero who was just enslaved to the Zerg. That was my biggest gripe. If at the end of SC2, they put a bullet in Kerrigan's head, I woulda given the game a 500 out of 10 just for having epic balls.

he did it mostly because he wanted to. another plot point was establishing, at least in jimmy's head, the the queen of blades and sarah are different people in the same bodies, he said he was going to kill the QoB, and he did with the artifact, he also managed to save sarah, win/win I guess.

and yeah, we are waaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyy off topic. so diablo 3? fun shit? I'm probably still going to get it eventually

EDIT: Looks like I should start a thread on this subject

The main thing for me was that is the biggest retcon I can't stand. If you remember when the Overmind creates the Queen of Blades, he specifically states that she will have some amount of free will, unlike his cerebrates. After the Overmind is destroyed, Sarah Kerrigan regains her senses. Instead of seeking redemption for what she did while the Queen of Blades, she uses her power over the Zerg to lash out at those who did it to her. She made her choices and trying to absolve her of them by saying that "Ohh, the Zerg DNA did it to her" is just lazy laaaazy writing.
I have no intention of buying Heart of the Swarm but I can only hope sparing Kerrigan comes back to bite Raynor in the ass later.

 

[Warachia]

All in all, I would have preferred it if they attempted to improve the stat system instead of just canning it altogether, but I am not gonna miss it if it was going to be equal or worse than D2's stat system.

That's a main problem I've found with a lot of companies these days, they have an interesting idea which doesn't really work out, so they decide to scrap the entire thing as opposed to try and improve it, I thought that was specifically what a beta was for, seeing what does and doesn't work, showing people what they are going to get in a game is a demo.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

All in all, I would have preferred it if they attempted to improve the stat system instead of just canning it altogether, but I am not gonna miss it if it was going to be equal or worse than D2's stat system.

That's a main problem I've found with a lot of companies these days, they have an interesting idea which doesn't really work out, so they decide to scrap the entire thing as opposed to try and improve it, I thought that was specifically what a beta was for, seeing what does and doesn't work, showing people what they are going to get in a game is a demo.

Yeah I was a bit interested in seeing how they'd rework the systems they had in mind and then I read they just dumped everything completely. I noticed that in Skyrim too. They couldn't make Radiant Story work so instead of fixing it, they just dumped the whole thing.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

I just want to say that I absolutely love the beta and can't wait for the game. People will nitpick about anything, but the game plays very well for a beta and looks to be going in the right direction to keep people playing for a LOOONGG time to come.

 

[Desaari]

I would suggest this thread for all those who don't understand how the game is changing:
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/3988231384

I've been playing the Diablo series just as long, if not longer, than this guy yet I still disagree with him. Not to mention that having played the series for a long time and being a "true super elite Diablo veteran for realz" doesn't make his argument any more valid than anyone else's.

He points out that Diablo II's attribute system wasn't so hot when it came down to it. I agree that once the game had been out for a while and the variables became knowns (EG: X suit of armour requires Y strength) the stat system became a number game that could be solved with spreadsheets and mathematics.
So if it's not working as intended then it should be altered and refined in order to balance the different stats, just as they're trying to do with the skill system. To quote the above linked rant:

"Pumping strength would not, and will not make your barb a bad !@#. It will give him, at most, a 5-10% increase in damage by the time he's 80, and you'll have sacrificed so much health that you'd be a miserable glass cannon."

The stats should be made more meaningful then, not simply removed from the game. Pumping points into strength should make your Barbarian into a damage dealing badass, and you shouldn't have to sacrifice so much for it not to be a viable option.
Instead, Blizzard's solution is to remove the system entirely and assign you pre-determined stats based on your level and class. You now have no choice over how your class plays. Every other player of the same class is exactly the same as you outside of gear. In what way does that sound like fun? I can't comprehend why people are defending this as if it were somehow a benefit to the players. So of course this new system is worse. It's worse by default because there no longer is a stat system.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

I just want to say that I absolutely love the beta and can't wait for the game. People will nitpick about anything, but the game plays very well for a beta and looks to be going in the right direction to keep people playing for a LOOONGG time to come.

Try a little harder, will ya. "People will nitpick everything" can just as easily be said about the opposite, "people will eat anything up".

Wow dude... relax.

I didn't attack you what-so-ever with my post, and to jump at me for voicing my opinion makes you look like a crybaby anti-fanboy who is pissed off that everyone in the world doesn't agree with him that Diablo 3 isn't going to be good and that Blizzard is an evil corporation, hellbent (no pun intended) on stealing your monies.

First thing's first, as someone who has been affiliated with a few minor gaming studios I can safely say that to judge a game based entirely off of the beta is naive. It sounds like you haven't even played it either, so I'd say you have nothing to stand on and you're just being cynical because you didn't like Starcraft 2.

The point of a beta is not to show you how good the game is. Blizzard gives you the first mission in the entire game with a lot of the plot taken out and forces you to play on the easiest difficulty because they want you to root out the bugs and not just get lost in the game. If you played Diablo II, then imagine that you only got to play up until defeating Blood Raven on normal. That's pretty much what you get with this beta. You get a third of the first act on normal difficulty.

There are a lot of very good players who will just get the beta and plow through it, working through the problems and often accepting them as part of the game experience. These people will go ***** about how the game isn't "fun" on random forums not affiliated with Blizzard, achieving nothing for either party. This, btw, is why they try so hard to diversify beta distribution.

Now, if you actually go check out the beta feedback forums, you will see that Blizzard is very much catering to the old school audience with their updates. For example, I see you have a problem with tool-tips (Although I really don't see why everyone hates it when a game they like becomes more accessible to people who haven't played it before. It just sounds like uber-hipsterism to me.). Well, I'll have you know that a lot of people complained about a few annoying, unnecessary tool-tips, and Blizzard responded saying that they will not be in the full game. Of course, they didn't take them out of the beta yet because, as we all know, a beta is NOT anywhere near the final version. Hell, it isn't even the same as the version of the game that they are working on now.

That being said, from what I've seen, I liked the Diablo 3 beta. It is exceptionally polished as far as mob placement and fluidity. Replayability seems to be incredible too, seeing as how this is my third time through and there are still new dungeons that weren't there the last two times.

Diablo is, at least for most of us who played it, about the items. I believe the CM actually addressed this when a few people complained about the skills trees and stats being simplified. Those things were important for the "single-player only" group, but they are really few and far-between. How many people did you honestly know who played Diablo as a single player only game? It's like playing World of Warcraft for the story. Those people are not the target audience and they are really missing the point of the game. It's about doing quests with your buddies over and over until you get nigh-godly equipment, and then upping the difficulty once you can. There is NONE of this in the beta. The best I saw was the ability to craft some rare master level items, but you can't use any of it.

Sorry for the wall of text, but you brought it on yourself with your uncalled for abrasiveness. How about you try a little harder to realize that your opinions are not fact. You're allowed to not like it, sure, but don't fucking antagonize me because I disagree with you. Alright?

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I just want to say that I absolutely love the beta and can't wait for the game. People will nitpick about anything, but the game plays very well for a beta and looks to be going in the right direction to keep people playing for a LOOONGG time to come.

I wish I could share these sentiments. I wasn't nitpicking the game just for the sake of looking for things to nitpick. I was extremely excited for Diablo 3 until I heard more and more about changes and I wanted playing the beta to surprise me in a good way. I was just let down in every possible way. I posted my thoughts in the beta forums also, so hopefully some of them will be considered as they did say core systems are still in a state of flux.
I was not looking for reasons to dislike the game. I was doing quite the opposite, there was just nothing there.