Why Diablo 3 is a bad game

[NeoShinGundam]

Didn't you see Jim Sterling's proof that Diablo 3 is blatantly better than Torchlight 2:
http://www.destructoid.com/diablo-iii-is-blatantly-better-than-torchlight-ii-229923.phtml
Reason #1 Always Online DRM (Digital Rights Merriment)
Reason #2 Diablo III Does Choice Correctly
Reason #3 Torchlight II Has Too Many Colors

 

[zinho73]

If the loot is on the AH means that you can get the loot without paying. Because the guy who put the loot there did. Simple as that.

If the loot is in the AH, mathematics says that your best chance to get it is buying it, because the chances for you to have a similar roll is close to zero given the way random number generators work on this game. Also, if you buy something to get an advantage you are paying to win. Simple as that. Sorry to break it to you.

You've missed Draech's point there. It is very viable to go through the game without using the auction house. The proof of this is in the auction house itself. Whatever is being sold there was a drop for some player somewhere along the line (and incidentally you can get ilvl 63 gear, the best in the game, from Act 1, so it's not a case of better geared players feeding the lesser players). Though I've used the auction house a lot myself, at one point recently (this is in Inferno) I had more than half of my slots filled with items I'd found myself.

I get it, but the fact that someone's have it doesn't mean it is viable. It means it was viable for that guy. I understand that eventually anything is possible, but D3 RNG are really bad seeded.

Look, I'm not inventing an statistic here.

That Force strategy guy, a man that loves the game and played for who knows how many hundred hours said that the game makes you feel like you need to buy gear.

There are hundreds of posts of people complaining about dumb drops and a lot of people (me included) that played for hours without an upgrade. This is not normal on any Action RPG I have played to date.

The best gear thing on ACT 1 is actually recent and a move and a move on the right direction but things are still pretty slow moving.

This drop rate argument doesn't add up though. You're suggesting that a higher drop rate would necessarily make the game more enjoyable. I'll tell you what it would do, it'd make the game a lot shorter.

One thing does not eliminate the other. It would make the game more enjoyable and also shorter, unfortunately. If Blizzard wanted us to have fun for a longer time, they could have made a higher level cap, ladders, PVP, endless dungeons. Yes - a boring grind is a way to make the game harder and longer, but is it the best way?

Gear is the point of the game; the endgame is loot grinding. As soon as someone has all the best items the game is over for them.

Yes, D3 is built that way, but this is not true for most of ARPGS. Action Rpgs that I have played in the past (Titan Quest, Torchlight, Diablo 2, Loki) are about progressing making fun and diverse builds, including gear and skills to kick ass. The very endgame is all about gear, I agree. And that's exactly why people are complaining about the RMAH - a lot of people that bought what they wanted suddenly realized that the game was over for them. And yes, that's self-defeating.

Further, if the drop rates are too low then you're going to get less trade in the AH and in the RMAH, which means less money for Blizzard. In other words, the idea that the drop rates were set lower than they should be due to the RMAH is ill founded. Still, they may not have got it exactly right on the first try, and in fact they have upped the rates slightly since release.

The drop rates are not too low for the AH. The drop rates are too low to be truly rewarding (also, quality of the items, not just the drop rates, but that's another can of worms). The AH should be there for people that want to be godlike, not for normal progress through the game. You might have not needed, but, trust me, a lot of people did.

Blizzard did not miscalculated slightly. People were quitting the game. They've made a serious mistake, they did almost everything wrong with their items:
- poor drop rates;
- bland uniques;
- useless and uninteresting affixes;
- set items with no bonuses (seriously, how do you do that?);
- poor seeding;
- over-dependence of some stats in items;

This is to be expected with a new game; Diablo 2 had years of patches, and an expansion, to get it right. Diablo 2 also had duping, so take the availability of decent gear in that game with a pinch of salt.

This is not to be expected. Diablo 2 had its problems, but things weren't nearly this bad. Blizzard is trying to fix things that should never get past the beta stage of the game.

Also, this argument is too condescending. If Diablo2 took its time to get it right, Blizzard should have learned those lessons. A developer of this caliber cannot afford to make the same mistakes that were made 10 years ago.

 

[LiberalOpinion]

Tl;dr
Nice one OP! But still too mild in judgment. You got lucky that you found something to like this game for, but I admit that it there could be some surface over the cracks...

Hi Zinho

Thank you for your quite analytical and especially reasonable explanation on the broken D3 game mechanics. I must admit that I still envy you, that you had fun with the game for a considerable amount of time. I personally was uberly bored by the game during all playthroughs. Eventually, these were only driven by the expectation that at some point a real Hack?n?Slay ARPG feeling as I knew it from the predecessors could be lurking behind the next corner. It was really the dumbed down mechanics on all the described layers which killed it for me already in normal mode. I rolled another character as I thought that maybe only the firstly chosen class was boring, but was proven wrong.

I give in, that the flow seems ok at first glance, but the lack of character customization left me without an aim. This made the whole process painfully pointless and thereby not entertaining. I mean in the end a game does not serve a purpose or sophisticated reason for the player to play it (It should simply be fun, right?). However, D3 is streamlining so obviously towards the poorly customized endgame itemization that it hurt me. There was a brief moment I was actually enjoying to wreak havoc on the demon hordes. But as soon as I realized to the end of act III in nightmare that there is not much to come except a bow with 60 dexterity than 50 dexterity, it fell from me. I should mention that I really enjoyed D2 and can get along with repetitive gameplay quite well. I even maxed fishing in WoW BC as you could make a certain use for it to progress in the game.

In the beginning I was a little bit confused that there were (and still are) people that like playing the game and actually have fun for hundreds of hours suddenly being struck by the fact that it feels like a dysfunctional grind mill. So there seems to be at least something in the game that can semi-sustainably establish the excitment of carving through devil minions. Yet it ultimately becomes disappointing for a considerable amount of players. That is why I would true and simply call it a bad game. My personal gaming experience ranges between disastrous and catastrophic, which I admit is due to my matter of taste. It certainly is not the worst game but if it were released by an unknown studio it would be rated quite poorly.

A quick call out for the people who think that the RMAH does not affect the way the game works and their playing experience if they do not use it: It does. Loot chances are clearly below a reasonable rewarding rate in order to prevent the economy to tank. That was more or less uneasily admitted by Bashiok at some earlier point in time. I know that there are a lot of people out there who still find the long lasting item hunt extra challenging. Believe me, if you put the loot balance point to higher rates you could have increased the overall level of player satisfaction a lot. But here again we see the valid point of the OP ? missing variety. If you would have had customizable characters you might been specifically looking for a different set of items than player X. Suddenly different types of item categories would be required and unsuspicious loot could be valuable to someone else to trade with. Simplicity killed it.

Moreover it is mere statistics. Superior items are found by players/bots who play a lot and put the stuff in the AH. Even at constant drop rates for every player (which is not the case as you get better loot at higher "levels") this ultimately erases the chance for the average player to find something which is better than what he could find on the AH. Fun fact: in order to avoid such a scenario in other games (take WoW, maybe Blizzard programmers know about that one?), you make good stuff BoE, BoP and have effective gold sinks in the game. If you as a company want to ?encourage trade? in an RMAH you leave these smart option out of the game and earn some extra revenues via micro transactions.

Nowadays, you obviously have inofficial trade channels and a black market even without the RMAH. But as it comes to almost fiscal policies, a strict law and order approach would have been much more healthy than this capitalistic beast of an AH which does nothing but exponentially extinguish the feeling to play a fun game. Spend real and expensive effort to identify sold stuff and let people lose their progress bought from these sources. Actually it would mean some rather strict regulations for trading (item tagging, delayed trade transactions for items and gold not found in the same game, and so on). I know that sounds sad and real-worldish but it is the only way to go if you feel that your GAME is overrun by greedy bastards or an (human labor)exploiting farming industry.

 

[ProtonGuy]

Original poster, I want to hug you, and then buy you a beer. This is exactly how I felt the moment I (finally, no thanks to error 37) logged in. It's a great game compared to half the crap out there today, but for a Blizzard title it might as well have been Wii shovel-ware.

 

[Bocaj2000]

OP, you're cute trying to copy your teacher. You are an internet nobody trying to critique a AAA game that is the most polished and artistically driven dungeon crawler I have ever played (until Diablo III it was Titan's Quest (Torchlight is okay at best)). Your critique skills are mostly opinion based and very poorly executed.

I suggest you rethink your argument or at least explain it better instead of talking about how your teacher wants you to improve. Blizzard isn't an art student drawing nudes; it is a company that has grown more than you can imagine.
EDIT:

Title of thread: "Why Diablo 3 is a bad game"

First, a little bit of history:


Compared to what we have in the market today, Diablo is not a bad game.

...

Diablo 3 is a bad game simply because you could have done a lot better and chose not to.

I am confused, do you like this game or not?

I almost forgot when you did this OP. This is gad arguing at its core. Never contradict yourself.

 

[Johnny Impact]

For decades critics have denounced the industry for paying too much attention to superficial features such as graphics, and not enough on the all important aspect of gameplay. With Diablo 3 we have a game that even the most emotive of haters seems to regard as having decent gameplay, but is then criticised on superficial grounds like its plot or it not being "dark" enough. It bothers me you can call Diablo 3 a bad game despite being fun. Being fun is the key indicator of a good game.

Pretty much this. I see tons of missed opportunities in the game -- what if Ghom swallowed the player, and he had to navigate a "cave" full of digestive juices and half-chewed victims before engaging the cave itself in battle, carving an escape through tissue that tried to constrict him? And that's just off the top of my head.

On the other hand I've put 80 hours into D3 because it's so much damn fun to click-click-click through legions of monsters.

 

[Don Savik]

May I ask why you think the game needs end game?

Its not a subscription game so it doesn't need it. Some people think that getting better gear is useless unless you can show it off to other people, but that doesn't hold true to the majority. The majority of D2 and D3 players played the game single player. The very nature of dungeon crawling to get cooler loot is whats addictive, and people find that fun.

Now, it doesn't have as much replayability as D2 or Torchlight, but I won't criticize it for "having no end game" because its not a game with any persistant anything. It doesn't have to constantly keep your attention. To be honest, dungeon crawler pvp is terrible. I don't think its a genre that was really based around having it be a big deal.

Is it lazy? Yes I guess you could say it is. I just don't think that "failed potential" is the same thing as "failure". Its fine mechanically, its well polished, good art design, just a tad linear than what we we're expecting. Dissapointing? Yes. Bad game? A little meh, but no.

I would give it....6.5/10 (5 being average, no IGN rating system bullshit)

captcha: steam punk <----WTF A COOL CAPTCHA? WHAT IS THIS SORCERY!??!?!

 

[WoW Killer]

I get it, but the fact that someone's have it doesn't mean it is viable. It means it was viable for that guy. I understand that eventually anything is possible, but D3 RNG are really bad seeded.

Look, I'm not inventing an statistic here.

Hmmm? The itemisation is poor which makes the loot quality sporadic as I've admitted, but that's nothing to do with the RNG seed. I'm not inventing any statistics either. I've found these literally in the time since my last post:

Spoiler

The gloves will go straight to my DH, and the belt... remember what I said about strength gear? Yeah I should roll a Barb. And you know what else? I had fun. Well, except for this guy, he wasn't fun:

Spoiler

That Force strategy guy...

...


Yes, D3 is built that way, but this is not true for most of ARPGS. Action Rpgs that I have played in the past (Titan Quest, Torchlight, Diablo 2, Loki) are about progressing making fun and diverse builds, including gear and skills to kick ass. The very endgame is all about gear, I agree. And that's exactly why people are complaining about the RMAH - a lot of people that bought what they wanted suddenly realized that the game was over for them. And yes, that's self-defeating.

Funny you should mention Force. He said in his last D3 video that he was expecting the loot grind because that was what D2 was all about. And having played D2 myself, that's what I was expecting too. I'm not sure what you believe D2 had; endgame was Baal runs. Over and over again. I was in every way a gear grind.

I happen to agree with a lot of what Force said by the way. He wasn't blaming the drop rates (RMAH yes; separate issue and I agree with him on that). He also quit after playing the shit out of the game. He got considerably more playtime than 100 hours, again putting the game at well above the average in value for money.

The rest of what you're saying is again that you think the drop rates are too low. I'm getting the odd decent drop almost every time I play. I feel like I'm progressing. If the drop rates were any higher maybe I'd have finished the game already. I can't say much more than that. Our experiences have differed.

 

[zinho73]

OP, you're cute trying to copy your teacher. You are an internet nobody trying to critique a AAA game that is the most polished and artistically driven dungeon crawler I have ever played (until Diablo III it was Titan's Quest (Torchlight is okay at best)).

Well, it is not a genre very populated, but I would say good for you?

Your critique skills are mostly opinion based and very poorly executed.

You understand that this is not a game review and it is an opinion piece, right?

I suggest you rethink your argument or at least explain it better instead of talking about how your teacher wants you to improve. Blizzard isn't an art student drawing nudes; it is a company that has grown more than you can imagine.

Yes, they've grown enough to get away with half-baked game design. About the explanation... Well, it is written there. I'm sorry if you didn't get it and I'm glad that others did. You can't win all, I suppose.

I almost forgot when you did this OP. This is gad arguing at its core. Never contradict yourself.

Hm.. It is supposed to be contradictory? Let me rephrase it to see if I can reach your superior level of understanding:
Although Diablo 3 is a good game by today's market standard, it is not good enough if we consider Blizzard's own standards in the past. That's why so many people have the feeling that the game is bad, even when it is selling seven million copies. It is simply not as polished or as tested.

 

[zinho73]

I get it, but the fact that someone's have it doesn't mean it is viable. It means it was viable for that guy. I understand that eventually anything is possible, but D3 RNG are really bad seeded.

Look, I'm not inventing an statistic here.

Hmmm? The itemisation is poor which makes the loot quality sporadic as I've admitted, but that's nothing to do with the RNG seed. I'm not inventing any statistics either. I've found these literally in the time since my last post:

Spoiler

The gloves will go straight to my DH, and the belt... remember what I said about strength gear? Yeah I should roll a Barb. And you know what else? I had fun. Well, except for this guy, he wasn't fun:

Spoiler

That Force strategy guy...

...


Yes, D3 is built that way, but this is not true for most of ARPGS. Action Rpgs that I have played in the past (Titan Quest, Torchlight, Diablo 2, Loki) are about progressing making fun and diverse builds, including gear and skills to kick ass. The very endgame is all about gear, I agree. And that's exactly why people are complaining about the RMAH - a lot of people that bought what they wanted suddenly realized that the game was over for them. And yes, that's self-defeating.

Funny you should mention Force. He said in his last D3 video that he was expecting the loot grind because that was what D2 was all about. And having played D2 myself, that's what I was expecting too. I'm not sure what you believe D2 had; endgame was Baal runs. Over and over again. I was in every way a gear grind.

I happen to agree with a lot of what Force said by the way. He wasn't blaming the drop rates (RMAH yes; separate issue and I agree with him on that). He also quit after playing the shit out of the game. He got considerably more playtime than 100 hours, again putting the game at well above the average in value for money.

The rest of what you're saying is again that you think the drop rates are too low. I'm getting the odd decent drop almost every time I play. I feel like I'm progressing. If the drop rates were any higher maybe I'd have finished the game already. I can't say much more than that. Our experiences have differed.

I guess this discussion derailed a bit, because the items problems in the D3 are not confined to low loot drops. It is not just a matter of quantity but quality as well. I just saw an example of a radiant chest in level 4 Hell giving two whites (not even money), this is a problem of quantity and quality. I understand the game is random, but this kind of randomness is way off the mark.

But let's try to wrap it even if we disagree in a bunch of things.

1. I never said people are not having fun with the game. I said i did - so the game can be fun and people are putting hours into it. OK.
2. Force said that the game feels like it is forcing you to go to the RMAH and that the RMAH was the end of the game to him because he payed his way to the endgame, eliminating the excitement of getting there. If this does not corroborate what I'm saying, I'm must be expressing myself really poorly. The game can only push you towards the AH if you are not getting the items you need in game. There's nothing else to buy on the AH.
3. The seeding is bad because you can get int stats in Barb only equipment and get consistently items that are well below your level, to make just two examples. The RNG seed determines what drops, when and with what stats.
4. I'm glad you are getting great items regularly, but your experience differs not just from mine but from the majority of the posters in the Blizzard forums.
5. I agree Blizzard is taking steps to change and fix the economy of the game (including loot but not limited to it) and you can see signs from this here and there. I hope they succeed, but they should have done their homework better.

Best

 

[zinho73]

May I ask why you think the game needs end game?

Its not a subscription game so it doesn't need it. Some people think that getting better gear is useless unless you can show it off to other people, but that doesn't hold true to the majority. The majority of D2 and D3 players played the game single player. The very nature of dungeon crawling to get cooler loot is whats addictive, and people find that fun.

Now, it doesn't have as much replayability as D2 or Torchlight, but I won't criticize it for "having no end game" because its not a game with any persistant anything. It doesn't have to constantly keep your attention. To be honest, dungeon crawler pvp is terrible. I don't think its a genre that was really based around having it be a big deal.

Is it lazy? Yes I guess you could say it is. I just don't think that "failed potential" is the same thing as "failure". Its fine mechanically, its well polished, good art design, just a tad linear than what we we're expecting. Dissapointing? Yes. Bad game? A little meh, but no.

I would give it....6.5/10 (5 being average, no IGN rating system bullshit)

captcha: steam punk <----WTF A COOL CAPTCHA? WHAT IS THIS SORCERY!??!?!

I'm not sure it is needed, I'm just saying it doesn't have it and that Blizzard expected that the item hunt would be sufficient to keep the game going for longer.

The thing is that, planned or not, D2 got an endgame of sorts and it included boss runs, PVP, ladders, trades and rerolling alts from the beginning to best fit endgame gear. It had its faults but it was compelling, hence the longevity of the game.

If I worked at D3 design team and received a 6.5 from someone that liked D2, I would considered that I failed. Badly.

 

[Bocaj2000]

OP, you're cute trying to copy your teacher. You are an internet nobody trying to critique a AAA game that is the most polished and artistically driven dungeon crawler I have ever played (until Diablo III it was Titan's Quest (Torchlight is okay at best)).

Well, it is not a genre very populated, but I would say good for you?

Your critique skills are mostly opinion based and very poorly executed.

You understand that this is not a game review and it is an opinion piece, right?

I suggest you rethink your argument or at least explain it better instead of talking about how your teacher wants you to improve. Blizzard isn't an art student drawing nudes; it is a company that has grown more than you can imagine.

Yes, they've grown enough to get away with half-baked game design. About the explanation... Well, it is written there. I'm sorry if you didn't get it and I'm glad that others did. You can't win all, I suppose.

I almost forgot when you did this OP. This is gad arguing at its core. Never contradict yourself.

Hm.. It is supposed to be contradictory? Let me rephrase it to see if I can reach your superior level of understanding:
Although Diablo 3 is a good game by today's market standard, it is not good enough if we consider Blizzard's own standards in the past. That's why so many people have the feeling that the game is bad, even when it is selling seven million copies. It is simply not as polished or as tested.

Line by line breakdown- cute.

Your OT was about growth. and reaching potential. Blizzard has gone from Lost Vinkings to Starcraft to Warcraft III ever improving their games. However, their games were stagnant, repeating the same systems, yet were very influential. Diablo III took several high risk chances including the simplification (yet complication) of their skill system which, believe it or not, separates them from competitors. Some people like the changes they made, some don't. Your opinion is more about preference than actual criticism. Different preferences doesn't make a game bad.

I guess what bothers me is your choice of words. When something doesn't reach potential, it's not "bad," it's disappointing. "Bad" means that there is no potential to begin with.

 

[WoW Killer]

snip

Barring the quality for a moment (which is awful as I've said), what's wrong with the quantity of rares? Two whites from a resplendent is very abnormal (this might even be a hard written block for chest farming; I've never seen anything that unlucky). Rares drop like candy. Have you not played since the NV changes? This is a typical ratio of yellows to blues (with zero magic find gear, just the 75% from NV stacks) hunting elites:

Spoiler

That's what you're looking at every time you go to the vendor (probably 10-15 mins). This is not based on luck; at 5 NV stacks you're getting guaranteed rares for packs and uniques.

The vast majority are vendor trash of course, but there's nothing wrong with the rate at which they're dropping. As I said earlier, I feel like it would be better if the drop rate was actually significantly lower and the itemisation forced the drops to be more useful. That's due to the psychological aspect of seeing a rare drop and thinking "sweet!" rather than "oh look, more vendor trash".

The actual rate at which you're finding relevant items (i.e. either a direct upgrade or an item you can trade for one) seems fine for the point I'm at in the game. Obviously the further you get the lower this rate of progression will be. At some point I'll be in the shoes of Force viewing any upgrade as a one in a million, and maybe at that point I'll get bored. But I'm 200 hours in, and if I'm still enjoying it at this point, how the hell can I complain even if I do eventually get bored? Very few games offer that kind of play time for a single purchase.

On the other hand I do agree with the criticisms aimed at the RMAH. It's not that you're ever forced to use the RMAH (as Draech was saying, the items do drop, as they wouldn't be up for auction otherwise). It's that eventually you're forced to use the RMAH as opposed to the GAH. This is what Force was getting at (Athene made the same point in his suggestions vid). Past a certain level of gear, you're never going to be able to buy upgrades with gold. When your gear is near perfect, any improvements that drop for another player are going straight to the RMAH. That's an issue I can agree with, as the drop rates are only fine so long as you are able to trade gear meant for other classes for stuff your own class can use.

I shouldn't take the official forums too seriously. You've got about as much chance getting an honest opinion of the game from there as you have getting an honest opinion of Mass Effect 3 from the official Bioware forums. The vast majority of posters will not have reached the point that Force did.

 

[zinho73]

To WOWKiller:

As I said, things do appear to be getting better after the patch and my problems with items was never at quantity alone (although it was an issue to and to others). I actually agree with you that if the items were great, the amount would be fine.

My original point was that it is possible (probably easier before the patch)to get into a wall and not advance in the game unless you go the AH.

You are saying that it doesn't matter because:
1. If you insist on farming you eventually break the wall.
- To this I can only say what I said before: D3 rewards you poorly compared to every other ARPG ever, so this can take awhile.

2. Even if you get bored and decided to go to the AH or quit the game you will get your money worth of fun.
- I agree that 100 to 200 hours is a very good value for a game, but the measure of fun is relative and very personal. The ending of Mass Effect spoiled the whole game for some. The disappointment with Diablo issues (that only become really apparent close to Inferno) might do the same for others.

On what Atthene and Force said, my impressions are:

1. Athene uses the AH a lot to progress in the game and he kinds of convince people to give him the gold to use it? I didn't get it . In any case - he is an example that the AH can become much more than a tool and actually a focus to people. To me it is more bad than good (although it can be viewed either way, I admit). But he did say that he thinks that, due to the state of the economy, people will be forced to use the money auction house.

2. That said, when Force says that he feels the game forces you to use the AH, he wasn't referring to this at all. He says that the game feels like forcing you into the AH (money or not) in order to progress. The problem is that, with the money AH all sense of accomplishment is lost. It also appeared to me that he made a point to progress in the game without using the AH, and defended that the AH wasn't needed to progress. He actually continues to defend this, because he says that game makes you feel that you need it (not that you actually need it).

I, personally, liked to get with my friends and play the game. Had a lot of fun, but after a certain point, the more I played, the more disappointed I got, the more boring it was and when I looked around, my list of 15 playing friends was reduced to 2.

 

[mindlesspuppet]

Areas are semi-random instead of full random like Torchlight 2;

I don't care about Torchlight; Diablo 3 isn't Torchlight. We need to stop comparing games to each other. God of War is/was not Dante's Inferno. They both carry themselves on their own merits. Diablo 3 has the same random map generations as it's predecessors, accept a few points aren't randomized like before because it's easier to code.

Diablo isn't Torchlight, but in a way Torchlight is Diablo. The people responsible for Diablo 1/Diablo 2 made Torchlight, that's why the comparison exists the way it does. They were pretty much forced to leave Blizzard because at the time Blizzard insisted Diablo 3 should be an MMO and the Diablo team did not agree.

Fact of the matter is one can argue Diablo 3 is only Diablo 3 in name, while Torchlight is the real successor to Diablo 2. It's not simply comparing two lightly, or unrelated, games.

 

[Arcane Azmadi]

I confess, although I haven't played any of the Diablo games myself, I can't help but wonder whether most of the massive praise for Diablo III is because the game itself has earned it, or simply because it's the sequel to Diablo II?

Seems to me a lot of people simply took the mindset that "Diablo II was a fantastic game. Look here comes Diablo III! GREATEST GAME OF THE YEAR!" I can't help but wonder if it's similar to the reason the Modern Warfare games continue to smash sales records with every release even though the series jumped the shark YEARS back. "It's Modern Warfare! It MUST be great!"

 

[Jdb]

Somebody compared Diablo 2 items to booster packs in Magic: The Gathering. I forget the cards he used to help the comparison, so maybe someone who knows this can help. When you defeat a boss in Diablo 2 (open a booster), most of the loot you get is junk (lands/commons), some of it makes you crazy powerful (?), and some of it is the first block to a whole new build (?).

In Diablo 3, everything is junk or a flat increase to DPS and survivability. There are no surprises like in Diablo 2.

 

[Xanthious]

I love the RMAH.

It is currently going to pay for my Heart of the Swarm copy.

I actually made some money out of it, but it is still not something that can be regarded as a feature that enhances gameplay.

Nor detract.

It is a separate entity in it self.

I never used it for anything else than the gear I would vendor anyway. it has had no effect on how I would play my game. It is the vegetarian option. Doesn't make your meal better, but available for those who needs it.

Now i hear you going "Its pay to win!" then how the heck did I get the items in the first place?

But it does detract from gameplay. In a game where the sole purpose is a gear hunt having someplace you can go and just buy the gear you need totally defeats the point of the game. Never mind that drop rates and difficulty have to be closely monitored because you don't want too good of drops or people won't feel the need to use the RMAH or even the regular one for that matter.

Everything in the game is designed to coerce people into buying gear in some way shape or form. Usable drops are pretty much nonexistent. Actually going out and relying on drops to gear your character up is all but a pointless endeavor due to the obscene way gear is randomized and the way drop rates are calculated. The reason they are randomized and calculated that way? The RMAH.

The asinine insistence on monetizing this game will ultimately be it's downfall. If the only reasonable way for people to get gear good enough to complete the end game stages of the game is to buy gear then what the hell is the point of playing?

 

[somonels]

Diable 3 is not a bad game, it's just tedious and does not spark interest.
Back to PoE... raargh, patch ruined my build.