Im just wondering because ive been thinking about this with many other games. the games i make (little indie pieces of crap) are released by episode (and are free, first episode will b released in the next few months). anywho, would you buy Diablo in Acts? for example, Guild wars is split into three campaigns. If the Acts took you a while to complete, not like D2 where u could beat the whole thing in a day, but where it would take like a month or so to complete. so Act1 is released, people spend like, 10-20$ for it and play it online single player wutever, then act 2 is released and when installed is like how Factions added on to GW. would you buy D3 like this? (not talking about the price, just in acts, if acts were long enough.) I myself think it would be kind of annoying for this type of game, but it would definantly allow Blizzard to release D3 earlier and give everyone a little taste of it.
heh, I'd probably still buy it but I would be pissed as %*@! about it!
Especially if the acts where as short as the Diablo II acts, and the gap between each Act release was too big.
Anyways I think its safe to assume that Diablo III will ship as a full game, and if anything we'll just get an expansion pack to it after a year or so.
Edit: but yea, I'd prefer to wait a little longer to get the game as a whole, I think it would be less frustrating than getting stuck in act 1 for a couple of months.
So what your saying is, in essence like a MMO, wherein new areas are patched in. But instead of patched it is store bought and installed. But the principle is the same. The game is constantly being added to. Much like the many, many expansion packs for Ever Quest of Guild Wars.
If the price worked out to be the same I probably would have less of a problem with it. If a 4 act game costs $100 NZ, then a 1 act game should logically cost 1/4 of that, i.e $25 NZ.
I'm not forking over an insane amount for just an act. This is not the same as a virtually entirely new game like Guild Wars, or anything resembling an expansion you just talking about an act.
There is bound to be some sort of "way point" or "teleport" system that can be exploited and thus allowing for rushes. While such an idea might discourage rushes, as there would be little to nothing to rush to, at least initially, I don't it would stop it.
Personally, I would prefer all 4 (or 5 or however many there are) in one game, plus an expansion adding one possibly two new areas.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth.
yea.. i dont no if i made it clear in the intial post, but the acts would have to be long, and the cost would have to be somewhat low. but yea, it would be like a big patch that you have to pay for, (if any of you remember duke nukem 3D, patch 1.5 cost a little bit of money, and added new guns and animations and stuff.) kinda like that but adding new acts and other diablo like things
No I would not, and it's the entire reason why I don't play through the HL2 episodes. Episodic content is terrible and promotes unfinished work. I'm so tired of unfinished games
that I'm just about ready to stop buying games altogether. Very few games I buy seem finished or complete. The oversights these companies make is already gigantic.
To be honest, the only saving grace D3 has right now in my eyes is that they are promoting COOP.
No, It makes you feel very bound (not as much freedom). This will probably be the first computer game i will pre-order and play from the first day. If the game is first released as a whole it will be overwhelmed with content complete all the quests, try to level as fast as possible, find the secrets of the game etc.
Although, i think it would make sence to do this (assuming that the total price of buying all the acts seperate will be the same as if you bought it as a whole). Think about it, gives time to people to complete all quests and actually find out the secrets of act1 (which they better put a lot of puzzles things like that). If this is implimented, by the time act 2 is released everyone will be in about the same place and have a lot of knowledge of act 1. Some of us have school or work wont be able to play like those kids who play 24/7, you have no chance to be caught up to them (lol they brag that they are such high levels, they look in the mirror and their eyes are bleading, dreaming of how they will kill diablo in their dreams etc). When Diablo is released it will be my SAT year which sucks.
If anything charge like 3-10$ for a demo (if they wanna make more money).
My Point: I personally want the game as a whole, BUT it isnt such a bad idea to do this. Gives players to actually examine act 1, enjoy the new colorful scenery (WHICH I LIKE!!) and try all the characters etc.
Sorry for any grammer problems, its 2:25 a.m. and i didnt read over my post.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not Even Death Can Save You From Me" ~ Diablo (II)
I wouldn't buy it that way. It'd be silly to break up a game. I can't hink of asingle reason not to realease it piece meal if the whole thing tells one story.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Poets, Priests and Politicians have words to thank for thier positions." De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da The Police
I don't really care as long as long as the price of all the Acts put together equals the price of the full thing. I am a slow player and by the time I finish Act I the whole game would probably be released, lol.
The HL2 idea is actually really good IMO. So far, the prices have been very decent, and the game itself is pretty lengthy (for eps). HL2 drops in amazing cliffhangers, and these cliffhangers leave you hanging (literally) for a long time.
The thing about HL2 is that it can be broken. In a way, its just 3 games, but short in length. They don't want the passionate fans to wait 6 years (estimate time of a proper HL 3) for the game, so they cut it up.
But to be honest, blizzard will never put this idea. Maybe a lot of expansions, but acts... won't work for rpg type games.
I dont like that sort of marketing and instantly rubs me the wrong way. I like to buy my games completed. I dont like the hassle of buying new episodes.
If they want to market it both ways, fine, but im only (considering) buying the finished package.
Especially if the acts where as short as the Diablo II acts, and the gap between each Act release was too big.
Anyways I think its safe to assume that Diablo III will ship as a full game, and if anything we'll just get an expansion pack to it after a year or so.
Edit: but yea, I'd prefer to wait a little longer to get the game as a whole, I think it would be less frustrating than getting stuck in act 1 for a couple of months.
If the price worked out to be the same I probably would have less of a problem with it. If a 4 act game costs $100 NZ, then a 1 act game should logically cost 1/4 of that, i.e $25 NZ.
I'm not forking over an insane amount for just an act. This is not the same as a virtually entirely new game like Guild Wars, or anything resembling an expansion you just talking about an act.
There is bound to be some sort of "way point" or "teleport" system that can be exploited and thus allowing for rushes. While such an idea might discourage rushes, as there would be little to nothing to rush to, at least initially, I don't it would stop it.
Personally, I would prefer all 4 (or 5 or however many there are) in one game, plus an expansion adding one possibly two new areas.
that I'm just about ready to stop buying games altogether. Very few games I buy seem finished or complete. The oversights these companies make is already gigantic.
To be honest, the only saving grace D3 has right now in my eyes is that they are promoting COOP.
Although, i think it would make sence to do this (assuming that the total price of buying all the acts seperate will be the same as if you bought it as a whole). Think about it, gives time to people to complete all quests and actually find out the secrets of act1 (which they better put a lot of puzzles things like that). If this is implimented, by the time act 2 is released everyone will be in about the same place and have a lot of knowledge of act 1. Some of us have school or work wont be able to play like those kids who play 24/7, you have no chance to be caught up to them (lol they brag that they are such high levels, they look in the mirror and their eyes are bleading, dreaming of how they will kill diablo in their dreams etc). When Diablo is released it will be my SAT year which sucks.
If anything charge like 3-10$ for a demo (if they wanna make more money).
My Point: I personally want the game as a whole, BUT it isnt such a bad idea to do this. Gives players to actually examine act 1, enjoy the new colorful scenery (WHICH I LIKE!!) and try all the characters etc.
Sorry for any grammer problems, its 2:25 a.m. and i didnt read over my post.
The thing about HL2 is that it can be broken. In a way, its just 3 games, but short in length. They don't want the passionate fans to wait 6 years (estimate time of a proper HL 3) for the game, so they cut it up.
But to be honest, blizzard will never put this idea. Maybe a lot of expansions, but acts... won't work for rpg type games.
Blizzard
Valve
:thumbsup:
If they want to market it both ways, fine, but im only (considering) buying the finished package.
~not going to buy a wow-ish diablo 3~
~this is the petition you're looking for~