Diablo III Beta Impressions

  • #205
    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Quote from Snaks42

    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)

    Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.

    Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.


    This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.


    No, it's meant to cash in on the original's name, otherwise this NEW game as you put it would have been called something new! It is a sequel, thus the number 3 after the title!

    I was not around this site when D2 launched, no. But I can safely say that upon playing the D2 beta after playing D1 for many years is that they felt similar to me, despite the many mechanical changes. D3 does not retain that feeling.


    You're just talking out of your ass now. I've played both D1 and D2 and loved them both. Upon firing up the beta I was right at home. It feels like a diablo game period.

    You need to realize that your examples of games that have similar styles, none of them made the 2D to 3D jump. It's a huge deal that D3 is no longer a 2D sprite based game.
  • #206
    Quote from Ragnar

    Quote from Snaks42

    Quote from Ragnar

    Quote from Snaks42

    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Quote from Snaks42

    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)

    Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.

    Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.


    This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.


    No, it's meant to cash in on the original's name, otherwise this NEW game as you put it would have been called something new! It is a sequel, thus the number 3 after the title!

    I was not around this site when D2 launched, no. But I can safely say that upon playing the D2 beta after playing D1 for many years is that they felt similar to me, despite the many mechanical changes. D3 does not retain that feeling.


    You can't safely say that, because that's false. D2 retains almost no mechanical features from D1, if any. IF you had beta tested D2 after playing D1 for years, I'm almost positive you, like a huge part of the populace, would have raged at how different it was. Go play an hour of D1, then D2, then D3 (if you have beta). They might as well be three different games.

    It's a sequel only technically. since it's a continuation of the story. Past that, it's completely different. The ONLY things that are the same are as follows; Isometric view, storyline, the barbarian. My whole point being that D3 is so vastly different, it can't be compared to something like God of war 1,2,3 in an argument that it should remain the same.


    For me diablo game is not only the art style or lore or sound or atmosfer or gamplay or rpg elements in creating your character, and lvling him. Combination of all this elements maid the diablo game one of the games that I love. If you remove some part of that, you change the game, and that is the main reason that some people that played d2 are against the choices they made. I asure you, if this was some other title, people would love this game, and all would support it. But this is a sequel to diablo game, that doesn't look like diablo game. When making a sequel, the most important thing is to improve the components of all aspects of game, not to remove them, or change them drasticly.


    Please re-read my posts as to why this isn't a sequel in the traditional sense, it's a brand new game. If you want to play D2 then go play D2. This isn't D2.5 as have been said, it's D3. It's completely different from the ground up, because it's a *new* game, not an expansion pack.


    I read it. You just say they are different, and I don't agree. Diablo 2 and 1 are more similar then diablo 3 and diablo 2.
    But your right about diablo 3, it is a new game, and that is a problem. its a new game, that has diablo name. They should've named it different, so we can get a real sequel to diablo series. They even change the lore of diablo 1 for it.


    Oh for gods sakes. Do some of you bitching even have access to the beta? This IS a diablo game. it feels like a diablo game, it plays like a diablo game. It's as damn addictive as the previous 2 if not more.

    Get over yourselves
  • #207
    You never quote me :QQ:
    Quote from Burzghash

    Regardless, there's no good reason for forcing permanence on people..
  • #208
    Quote from Crysto37

    You never quote me :QQ:


    There you are, you're favourite person has quoted you... You're so cute with all your whining *pinches Crysto37's cheeks*... Want a treat? Whose a good boy!?

    Again, agree to disagree 0_o... Come on people, this used to be such a happy place!

    You just lost

    THE GAME!!!
  • #209
    Quote from Leeodin

    Quote from Crysto37

    You never quote me :QQ:


    There you are, you're favourite person has quoted you... You're so cute with all your whining *pinches Crysto37's cheeks*... Want a treat? Whose a good boy!?

    Again, agree to disagree 0_o... Come on people, this used to be such a happy place!


    You could ask me: Does Polly want a cracker ?
    Quote from Burzghash

    Regardless, there's no good reason for forcing permanence on people..
  • #210
    Boring thread.
  • #211
    Quote from Ayr

    Boring thread.


    Good job on livening it right up bud!
  • #212
    Quote from Ragnar

    Quote from rozmata

    Ok, I say you could still like UFO Enemy Unknown more than any other similar game as you liked its mechanics (like I do (and Jagged Alliance, too)), but if somebody for example take Diablo mechanics and mix it with horrible kindergarten like graphics I wouldn't play that game. So I believe that people who never played Diablo but played TL may like TL2 even better (as they have commulated feelings towards TL and never disagree with its art style from the start) buy it should not be true for any Diablo fan who like Diablo because of its art and mood.


    Man, not to play a awesome game because of graphic is wrong. And am telling you that a lot of diablo players, even that they don't like the art style (including me) will play the game because of mechanic, and most important BECAUSE IT'S FUN. How many players did play WoW that played also diablo games? A lot, and it had really cartony and childish graphic. You are trying to say that diablo players won't play anything else if it has cartony grafic and is not the same as in diablo. Funny thing is that diablo 3 has different art style then original (you said it yourself), and looks cartony compered to old diablo, and people will still play it. Becose its fun.
    If your theory is true, no one from older players of diablo would ever play diablo 3.


    The thing is that because I was very bored some time ago I gave TL a go. But it didn't seem very fun. Not even comapring to D2 which was very old. So if its mechanics are any good I believe it was not enough to be fun. Maybe if they had D2 art style I would stick to it for much longer. If many people who will play TL2 say it is fun (without Diablo kind of art) I am sure I will give it a try. But it will have to be superbly fun to keep me playing with TL graphics/mood.
  • #213
    Quote from Ayr

    Boring thread.


    so why post if its boringfor you? Just to troll or increase the post counter?
  • #214
    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)

    Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.

    Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.


    I don't see that graphic is any worse. Characters are more badass and they look much better. I would probably remove some excessive orangy colors of the lanterns and other lights and let people reduce amount/strength of visual effects, but you can achieve similar results with filters which are currently available. I don't know what other things are really that different. Try to produce some table of differences, one column D2, another D3 and check if things actually changed so much in graphic area (especially for worse). Oh, and do it after you apply that darken and if you'd like sharpen filter some people use which makes D3 more similar to D2.
  • #215
    Quote from Alcovitch


    Oh for gods sakes. Do some of you bitching even have access to the beta? This IS a diablo game. it feels like a diablo game, it plays like a diablo game. It's as damn addictive as the previous 2 if not more.

    Get over yourselves

    It plays like diablo game , but does not fully feels like a diablo game. There is no fun in some aspect of game that i had in d2.

    Quote from rozmata


    The thing is that because I was very bored some time ago I gave TL a go. But it didn't seem very fun. Not even comapring to D2 which was very old. So if its mechanics are any good I believe it was not enough to be fun. Maybe if they had D2 art style I would stick to it for much longer. If many people who will play TL2 say it is fun (without Diablo kind of art) I am sure I will give it a try. But it will have to be superbly fun to keep me playing with TL graphics/mood.


    I never said torchlight was a good game. Torchlight 2 can be, but only time will tell. But I'm glad that you would play a good game, even if it had bad grafic.
  • #216
    Quote from Ragnar



    It plays like diablo game , but does not fully feels like a diablo game. There is no fun in some aspect of game that i had in d2.


    I don't have beta but from what I remember my experience from the Den of Evil to Blood Raven wasn't very spectacular and I feel it didn't give an OVERALL D2 feel. I found by rescuing Cain and onwards the D2 experience really took off... kind of hard to state what a game feels like when you have 5-8% of content to work with.
    Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
  • #217
    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Quote from GladHeHasBeta

    Quote from Ragnar

    There is no lvl progression, because you don't improve skills nor do you improve stats, it's all done automatically, that's why leveling is not fun anymore.


    some skills increase in power/duration each level, you learn new abilities all the way up to lvl 30 and for the entire game you find different kinds and levels of runes to put in your skills to test out and to increase in power.

    the ONLY thing thats changed is there are no attributes, which everyone agrees was a FAIL system. and the skill tree system was equally fail. your just blind and not thinking logically about it, you just think "oh nos no attribute allocation = auto leveling?!".


    You should really stop putting words in people's mouths. The attribute system is not a failed system in my book, nor is the skill tree system. They may have been poorly implemented, but considering they *are* using an attribute based system, it means that they find it fine. They are just changing how they operate, from being controlled by the player, to being controlled automatically. The same with the skills themselves. In my mind this is a step backwards, and I don't agree with their current implementation as I do not have as much customization with the characters. I believe they need to give players something to do upon level-ups, and hope to hear some news to that effect with their rebalancing of skills and such.


    It looks like some people think that Diablo 3 may feel like arcade as they cannot make as many irreversible mistakes when they level. But would you rather have respec ala WoW, because I can tell you now that currently not many people would agree that creating new character every time they make a mistake is what they want to do. Now if finding all runes is made too easy then D3 will become arcade game which requires fast reflexes/thinking only (which is not so bad as you can level till lvl 60 anyway and what then?). But if they make better/all runes difficult to find it will stay a good RPG game (though I'm not sure if first Diablo wasn't intended to be mostly just hack and slash and RPG elements were just nice to have elements) as you will have to think about skill you want to put it on as you may not be able find same rune for a long while and it will be both irreversible and reversible change as you cannot assign that rune to different skill anymore but you still may find another one later on. So you don't loose anything. You still kind of keep irreversible elements of the game but they are not permanent so you don't have to create new character which is incredibly annoying for whomever already put more than 100h in creating they character which they now have to delete! But if you never gone through nightmare/hell in D2 before, then I can understand that killing your character may not be a big deal for you.
  • #218
    Quote from Snaks42

    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)

    Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.

    Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.


    This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.

    Also either you weren't around, or you're just forgetting, but people threw SHIT fits over D2! It was actually more whining then D3 is getting. People saw this strange outside style, and yelled they aren't being faithful to D1. People saw trailers where the hero was outside, in the sun! Omg lighting! The list goes on, on how vastly different D2 was to D1, and how people freaked out because they were afraid of change. D1 was an awesome game, how can you make an almost completely different game Blizzard?! Well, considering the majority of whiners on Dfans site D2 as their prime example of what a game should be, I would say D2 did very well.

    And just like they did with D2, after D3 hits it will be our standard for how the next Diablo game / anything close to it should be.


    You are my hero man :D Well said!
  • #219
    Quote from rozmata

    Quote from Snaks42

    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Torchlight's "cartoony" style does not bother me, nor does Deathspank for example. The difference is that those games are new games that have established themselves with that look. Torchlight 2 doesn't change the visual style from the 1st game, it enhances it. The second and third Deathspanks do the same thing. When playing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, visually they are similar in style. God of War 1, 2, and 3 and the handhelds? Similar. Mass Effect 1 and 2? similar (and it looks as though 3 is going to be as well)

    Diablo III however is setting out to be more similar in style to other games, not it's own series. This is where I have an issue. It may have the same style of mechanics, but it is not the same thing, much like Team Fortress compared with Counterstrike.

    Consistency is key here, and Diablo III is not consistent with other games in its own lineup, visually. Diablo 1 and 2 were hugely different in mechanics (much like 2 and 3 are), and the games played similarly, but the reason people accepted D2 when it came out wasn't because of the mechanics. It was because visually they remained similar in character design, world design and overall thematic style. With Diablo III departing from that, it makes me worry that they are trying to cater more towards another market, and not those that followed the series in the first place. In my mind, if they wanted to create a new game with a new style and similar mechanics, they should have called it something completely different, like "Sanctuary" or something, rather than banking on the Diablo name.


    This is because D3 is a WHOLE new game. All those games you listed were just sequels. Sequels using (most of them) the same engines, the very same style. D3 might as well be named New Diablo 1, because it's MEANT to be completely different.

    Also either you weren't around, or you're just forgetting, but people threw SHIT fits over D2! It was actually more whining then D3 is getting. People saw this strange outside style, and yelled they aren't being faithful to D1. People saw trailers where the hero was outside, in the sun! Omg lighting! The list goes on, on how vastly different D2 was to D1, and how people freaked out because they were afraid of change. D1 was an awesome game, how can you make an almost completely different game Blizzard?! Well, considering the majority of whiners on Dfans site D2 as their prime example of what a game should be, I would say D2 did very well.

    And just like they did with D2, after D3 hits it will be our standard for how the next Diablo game / anything close to it should be.


    You are my hero man :D Well said!


    ty sir =D
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChB2_IPc-HVXbi0jS1Riljg
    ^ YouTube.Com/IceBleuGaming ! It's a thing! Check it oooout!
  • #220
    @ Rozmata & Snaks 42

    Agreed, well put.
    Playing Diablo since 97. I know nothing and having nothing good to say, I be a troll.
  • #221
    Quote from Leeodin

    Seriously...

    As someone else said, just agree ot disagree already. None of this matters anyway. Blizzard will make the game they want to make and those of us that like the new will enjoy it, and those of us that don't will go back to the old.

    Look at Smash Bros as a similar argument. Brawl recieved mixed reviews and many people (including myself) still play Melee instead; because we prefer the mechanics of it.

    If you like the mechanics of the old game more, the old game is still there for you to play. Not like D2 is going anywhere.

    I don't even love every change myself, but most changes at least make sense; but like I said, Blizz will release the game they want to release and none of this will matter as you will all buy the game anyway, and if you don't, well go enjoy whatever other games you prefer to play as there are no shortage of awesome games to play at the moment.


    Man, please don't tell them to go anywhere. I'm dying from waiting for Diablo 3 already. If they disappear too I will have nothing to do and nobody to talk to. Let me enjoy this topic even if it is ridiculous as it is :)
  • #222
    Quote from Alcovitch

    Quote from Ayr

    Boring thread.


    Good job on livening it right up bud!


    Blizzard should give all of us from this thread a copy of Beta so we shut the f..k up and open our mouths again when it's too late and game is already released :D
  • #223
    Quote from rozmata

    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Quote from GladHeHasBeta

    Quote from Ragnar

    There is no lvl progression, because you don't improve skills nor do you improve stats, it's all done automatically, that's why leveling is not fun anymore.


    some skills increase in power/duration each level, you learn new abilities all the way up to lvl 30 and for the entire game you find different kinds and levels of runes to put in your skills to test out and to increase in power.

    the ONLY thing thats changed is there are no attributes, which everyone agrees was a FAIL system. and the skill tree system was equally fail. your just blind and not thinking logically about it, you just think "oh nos no attribute allocation = auto leveling?!".


    You should really stop putting words in people's mouths. The attribute system is not a failed system in my book, nor is the skill tree system. They may have been poorly implemented, but considering they *are* using an attribute based system, it means that they find it fine. They are just changing how they operate, from being controlled by the player, to being controlled automatically. The same with the skills themselves. In my mind this is a step backwards, and I don't agree with their current implementation as I do not have as much customization with the characters. I believe they need to give players something to do upon level-ups, and hope to hear some news to that effect with their rebalancing of skills and such.


    It looks like some people think that Diablo 3 may feel like arcade as they cannot make as many irreversible mistakes when they level. But would you rather have respec ala WoW, because I can tell you now that currently not many people would agree that creating new character every time they make a mistake is what they want to do. Now if finding all runes is made too easy then D3 will become arcade game which requires fast reflexes/thinking only (which is not so bad as you can level till lvl 60 anyway and what then?). But if they make better/all runes difficult to find it will stay a good RPG game (though I'm not sure if first Diablo wasn't intended to be mostly just hack and slash and RPG elements were just nice to have elements) as you will have to think about skill you want to put it on as you may not be able find same rune for a long while and it will be both irreversible and reversible change as you cannot assign that rune to different skill anymore but you still may find another one later on. So you don't loose anything. You still kind of keep irreversible elements of the game but they are not permanent so you don't have to create new character which is incredibly annoying for whomever already put more than 100h in creating they character which they now have to delete! But if you never gone through nightmare/hell in D2 before, then I can understand that killing your character may not be a big deal for you.


    The problem is not respect, but free respect. It will break the game in hell and inferno, because you'll always respect the skills for every boss, or every hard situations. Respect should be there only for reparing bad builds, but it should not be there for having all skills available to you for free.
    By removing skill points, you can only customize by items .The problem is, that I need to find that runs, so i can play the way I want. I would like much more if runes where skills, and not items. Because if I don't get runes, i can't create the build I want. .Personally I don't like that diablo 3 is much more dipending on items, for customizing your build then it was in d2. But i see, that a lot of people like it, so different people different tastes.
  • #224
    Quote from Ragnar


    The problem is not respect, but free respect. It will break the game in hell and inferno, because you'll always respect the skills for every boss, or every hard situations. Respect should be there only for reparing bad builds, but it should not be there for having all skills available to you for free.
    By removing skill points, you can only customize by items .The problem is, that I need to find that runs, so i can play the way I want. I would like much more if runes where skills, and not items. Because if I don't get runes, i can't create the build I want. .Personally I don't like that diablo 3 is much more dipending on items, for customizing your build then it was in d2. But i see, that a lot of people like it, so different people different tastes.


    I would argue to you, are you going to be switching with every new challenge that comes up? Probably not, so why would you assume every other player will too? When we get to the inferno farming stage, it's going to cost us a lot in time to be constantly switching, and I actually haven't read one player so far that plans on switching all the time. In fact ALL I read are players planning on picking one build and sticking to it. *if* people are so hell bent on switching (which they aren't) then they will just go to town to switch, or pay whatever fine you want slapped on them. It's not going to break the game, in fact it makes the game that much better =D
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChB2_IPc-HVXbi0jS1Riljg
    ^ YouTube.Com/IceBleuGaming ! It's a thing! Check it oooout!
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes