Diablo III Beta Impressions

  • #24
    Quote from Alcovitch

    My two main issues so far with the beta:

    UI: It's just Humongous. Why is the health/resource and everything in between bar so damn big? Is the UI scale set to "Blind People"? I wish they would have a UI Scale option like in World of Warcraft. I really don't need the UI so overly large and in my face like it is currently.

    The RMAH: Why is this so poorly implemented? The search functions just plain suck. Why can I not filter by only equipable items? Why can't I choose specific values for stats etc? Why didn't they copy the excellent layout and function of the WoW auction house and tweak that to fit their needs?

    Another grip with the RMAH is it searches based on the character you have selected. You can change which character it's searching for with a drop down, but if you name all your characters the same (which I did and this is a feature of the game) then you can't tell which character is which class...

    Currently the RMAH seems really under developed. I hope it gets a major UI pass before release.


    I actually don't have an issue with the UI, but my question would be what size monitor are you using? I know blizzard took out some features in the beta for settings (such as ultra settings and whatnot) and I'm thinking they might have a UI scale with release. But maybe a tiny monitor displays it wrong, idk =D

    Edit : Just checked to make sure I just didn't notice. I use a 27" monitor and I must say if anything, the char UI including the orbs might be a tad small. It might just be a problem depending on monitor size =P
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChB2_IPc-HVXbi0jS1Riljg
    ^ YouTube.Com/IceBleuGaming ! It's a thing! Check it oooout!
  • #25
    Quote from Snaks42

    Quote from Alcovitch

    My two main issues so far with the beta:

    UI: It's just Humongous. Why is the health/resource and everything in between bar so damn big? Is the UI scale set to "Blind People"? I wish they would have a UI Scale option like in World of Warcraft. I really don't need the UI so overly large and in my face like it is currently.

    The RMAH: Why is this so poorly implemented? The search functions just plain suck. Why can I not filter by only equipable items? Why can't I choose specific values for stats etc? Why didn't they copy the excellent layout and function of the WoW auction house and tweak that to fit their needs?

    Another grip with the RMAH is it searches based on the character you have selected. You can change which character it's searching for with a drop down, but if you name all your characters the same (which I did and this is a feature of the game) then you can't tell which character is which class...

    Currently the RMAH seems really under developed. I hope it gets a major UI pass before release.


    I actually don't have an issue with the UI, but my question would be what size monitor are you using? I know blizzard took out some features in the beta for settings (such as ultra settings and whatnot) and I'm thinking they might have a UI scale with release. But maybe a tiny monitor displays it wrong, idk =D

    Edit : Just checked to make sure I just didn't notice. I use a 27" monitor and I must say if anything, the char UI including the orbs might be a tad small. It might just be a problem depending on monitor size =P


    It's not a question of monitor size. I get what you mean. You mean resolution.

    I have a 24'' monitor and I run the beta at native 1920x1080. This is pretty standard now. having a 27 inch doesn't really change much. You're typically just stretching the same image over a larger surface at the same rez (assuming your going 1080P)

    I find the UI huge. I really hope the Ultra settings have a bit more punch of those of us with higher end pcs and it has a UI scale.
  • #26
    Quote from Alcovitch


    I find the UI huge. I really hope the Ultra settings have a bit more punch of those of us with higher end pcs and it has a UI scale.


    ya my PC pwns and cant wait to run it on ultra settings to see how sexy it looks
    "once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
  • #27
    Quote from GladHeHasBeta

    Quote from Alcovitch

    I find the UI huge. I really hope the Ultra settings have a bit more punch of those of us with higher end pcs and it has a UI scale.


    ya my PC pwns and cant wait to run it on ultra settings to see how sexy it looks


    It looks terrible, sorry to say.
    I have a beastmode comp, run everything on ultra and it still barely scratches the surface of my technology,
    The games graphics are outdated and it's not even released yet.
    Then again, what do you expect when the game is 10 years old already.
    GG
  • #28
    Quote from Raxxed

    Quote from GladHeHasBeta

    Quote from Alcovitch

    I find the UI huge. I really hope the Ultra settings have a bit more punch of those of us with higher end pcs and it has a UI scale.


    ya my PC pwns and cant wait to run it on ultra settings to see how sexy it looks


    It looks terrible, sorry to say.
    I have a beastmode comp, run everything on ultra and it still barely scratches the surface of my technology,
    The games graphics are outdated and it's not even released yet.
    Then again, what do you expect when the game is 10 years old already.
    GG


    lol you think D3 looks terrible? what are you smoking? were you expecting them to look realistic? also there is no ultra mode yet so you havent tested it, no one has. on release they will allow an ultra option.they made the graphics this way on PURPOSE. FYI. they NEVER wanted it to look "realistic".
    "once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
  • #29
    I disagree with many of your UI criticisms. Not strongly, but they just didn't bother me. The main menu was simple enough for me to get in and get out and into the game, which is all I really want. Same thing with the lore and in game UI. I do agree, however with your "empty slot" pop up (I think it goes on until you have all the armor slots, it stops appearing in my games when I finally get a pauldron, which always seems to take awhile). Also, for some reason, my WD kept putting my second skill into the skill bar, instead of right click (I know you can change what is in each slot by right clicking on the skill). So now I have two zombie dogs, spirit walk, and my two mouse buttons. It just looks odd to have 1 and 2 be zombie dogs.

    The brightness was fine to me. As has been said before, this is a rather well lit ruins. Not sure why there are so many torches, but there are. I would, however, like to see the "bottomless pit" fog turned a darker shade. Maybe dark purple if they don't want it to be black. It's just odd to have glow coming up from there (unless it somehow fits the floor of more floors we haven't seen that are being lit by the meteor). I realize this is a personal thing, so I don't get that annoyed when people say they don't like it. I do when they start acting like it affects the game a whole bunch, like we're getting a Mario game or something. I personally hate it when games do a "brown means gritty" or "darkness means scary." To me, brown just makes it boring, and darkness just makes the game no fun to play (if I have to struggle to see something in the same room as me, with the exception of special hidden camo type enemies, it's poor game design, imo).

    As to the customization, well, we haven't even see have the skills yet, so it is hard to tell. That said, I can start to see some veins, such as if you want to be a crowd control vs dps in both wizard and WD. I still think there will be the cookie cutter builds, but they'll be based around finding certain types of gear. Which is basically like the cookie cutter builds we had before, except you don't have to worry about accidentally screwing up. That's really how I see the auto stats too. Instead of saying "I want to play a bonemancer, I need more mana" you say "I want to play a spirit WD, I need to find items that increase mana, and maybe ones that increase defense because I might not have my pets."

    As for no excitement when you level up...compared to D2? Are you saying that the vast majority of the levels, being nothing but a single skill point and a few stat points, was better? I mean, how many levels do you have to go just to get to your first second skill? And dumping a point into a skill? Unless it was the first, it made so little difference it was stupid. And, if you haven't noticed, skills in D3 go up at each level too. So, for skills, it's like the majority of the "no new skill" levels are combined with the rare "new skill" levels to many almost every level gives you a new skill. Much more fun, in my opinion, to see what those new skills do. Which you can do, because you don't have to worry about saving all your points for skills you won't see until your lvl 30, because those skills were the only ones that did enough damage to hack it in hell, but only if you dumped all your skills in them.

    Does this mean you're less likely to reroll the same class? Yeah, sure, you're never going to reroll to try a different build. You'll still reroll for all the other reasons (wanting to level up again? Playing with a lower level friend? Forgot to resign in in time and you lost your character?).


    Finally, it's not something that has been mentioned, but after playing some with 3 other players, I totally agree with Blizzard when they said 8 players would be too many. The skills are WAY more flashy this time around, and stuff gets lost with 4 lvl 10 characters now. 8 would just be insane, you wouldn't know what was going on. I think this feeds into what you did mention, with the enemy flashing and all when you hit them. Having a "hit" sound would quickly be drowned out with 3 other players and who knows how many pets, hirelings, and mobs hitting every which way at once. In fact, I got so used to it, when I first got disintegrate, it throw me for a loop because enemies don't flash when they get hit, and so it's hard to tell if you lined up the multiple baddies correctly.
  • #30
    Quote from Sn1p3ras

    Well,I really like when people start criticizing a game that has not even got out yet...

    But anyway!Maybe that's just me..Wanting to see something different that a copy from a game that is ONLY 11 years old! I'd say let's bring back in D3 the pixel gaming and the low AI that was back then.. Cause yes even if you guys don't want to admit it the AI back then sucked compered to the one that we see today.

    Parton me for my language but I'm getting tired of seen people comparing Diablo 3 with D2/1 or any other game every single time! But we just miss the point.. That we compare the >>BETA

    I admit that there were things that didn't sound me right on the removal part but that's how it is - in the very end! If we don't like the game we don't buy it,none is forcing us to do so.Simple us that.

    Anyhow,I hope none gets offended by this cause my purpose is not to insult or flame at anyone. :kirby:
    When are we supposed to give our criticism of the game? Once it's out and we're stuck with it? Or before it comes out when we can voice our concerns and see if they will change?

    It is valid to compare things when they are comparable, like comparing games in the same series and/or genre. That's kind of the point. I don't want a copy of an old game as well, but I do want a game that takes on a similar aesthetic as the previous games that it takes its name from! Not only that, if there are improvements that can be made that newer games have adopted, by all means, incorporate those kind of ideas. But change for the sake of change is not good, especially considering the pedigree, and the fact that the original games were liked by as many people as they were for a reason!

    I see a lot of Diablo III as change for the sake of change, and not for a change that will improve the game-play, or aesthetics. But if you read what I jotted down, many things were just minor tweaks that could be implemented that some people find bothersome, and others don't. The kicker is that if they were implemented, the people that don't find it bothersome won't care, and the ones that do will be appeased! Things like dimming the mini-map, or changing the monster outline for example. Changing the intro screens. Lessening the intrusion of the UI. Altering these things are relatively simple to do and would do wonders for the aesthetics of the game. Not only that, it wouldn't detract from the game-play in any way! Then why not change it?

    I find that this game seems to only have black and white fans, either you like it, and nothing can possibly be wrong with the game and any suggestion of altering anything is met with derision and hatred. Or you hate it and everything about the game needs to be changed so utterly and completely as to be unrecognisable in its current form and if you can't see that you are blind!

    Can we not have changes that both sides can agree that changing them won't hurt the "current vision" and will make the detractors more happy?

    I know that there is lots in this game that upsets me personally, but I know that in the final product, I am going to be stuck with those decisions. It is why I'm hoping for mods to be able to fix that (yes, I know they will be unsupported). I know that I'm not counting on those mods right away, but they will come, much like the D2 ones came before patch 1.10 to help. It's just a matter of time. And if not, there will always be other games.

    It's just too bad that the game that I have been waiting for for over 10 years is causing doubt in me. Of course it's based upon an extremely limited Beta version, but it is not as if Blizzard has shown us any different! But I won't sit idly by and say everything is absolutely perfect with everything I've seen in the Beta, not only because they have asked for feedback, but also because everything is not perfect!

    I hope that there will be considerable changes to the game before it launches, and hopefully those changes will give it more of the "Diablo Soul" that it is sorely missing. As it is, so far it seems a very shallow game, and I doubt the longevity, but maybe they will prove me wrong. I truly hope they do.
  • #31
    Lord_Jaroh

    I have no idea what you are talking about when you say this game doesn't have the "Diablo soul". I can tell you I felt right at home playing the beta and sunk way too many hours in it to be healthy and it's only a tiny fraction of the full game.

    Some of your graphics complains are simply a by product of moving from 2D sprite based game with a limited color palette to a 3D environment with a much broader color palette. Diablo 3 is no less "Dark" then it's predecessors. Dark doesn't specifically mean no light and all shadow, it' has to do with the ambiance and setting. There's plenty of Diablo in Diablo 3.
  • #32
    Quote from Kazlan

    It kind of sounds like you want to play Diablo 2


    The way people make it appear, it almost sounds like D3 is nothing like D2... which is sad, because D2 was epic.

    As for the "watered down" parts... if it's too watered down and basic, I'm just going to stop playing it, really. I don't want watred down, I want Diablo 3... not a "Diablo-esque" version of WoW.

    Seriously, this game better live up to its expectations, or I know many people who will quite simply kick Blizzard ot the curb, like we have done with other gaming companies as of late (Bethesda, EA, 2K Sports, etc).
  • #33
    Quote from Azidonis

    Quote from Kazlan

    It kind of sounds like you want to play Diablo 2


    The way people make it appear, it almost sounds like D3 is nothing like D2... which is sad, because D2 was epic.

    As for the "watered down" parts... if it's too watered down and basic, I'm just going to stop playing it, really. I don't want watred down, I want Diablo 3... not a "Diablo-esque" version of WoW.

    Seriously, this game better live up to its expectations, or I know many people who will quite simply kick Blizzard ot the curb, like we have done with other gaming companies as of late (Bethesda, EA, 2K Sports, etc).




    I wouldn't worry too much, the game is fine. It's not perfect in my books, but then again if it was it wouldn't be perfect in anyone else's books because everyone's books are slightly different. That's why I was a little surprised with his Lordship's wall-o-text. I've played the beta and, sure, it's not exactly how I would have made it, but then again it's very fun.

    For those of you who haven't gotten beta, here's a promising sign: there are some people raging, but they aren't really united in rage against any one particular feature of the game. Sure, some people don't like the new skill system, but from what I can see that's due to their own very narrow definition of build diversity, and it's not even like those people are in the majority amongst the h8ers. Some other people don't like the colour scheme and even if we accept that as a genuine criticism and not a big ridiculous joke that someone made up which somehow metastasized, those people are again the brave, the few, the raging. I could go on and on, but if we just keep in mind that the people who actually bother to make accounts on these forums are heavily skewed towards the superhardcore fans, some of whom must statistically be impossible to please or even carry on a sane conversation with, the fact that only a few nutters are saying "Blizzard had a brain anneurysm on this one and I'm never buying another one of their products ever again or even going to a country with a cold climate for fear of encountering a blizzard" is heartening.

    I'm not saying I love everything, or that there's nothing I could nitpick if I wanted to. That would be the other ridiculous extreme, and there are just as many nutjobs on here who have that opinion. I haven't bothered to make a thread about my criticisms because they're pretty minor. I'd like a bigger penalty for changing skills on the fly, like you take a hit to your durability or something. That'd be nice, because it'd create a real penalty that people would have to weigh against the benefit of changing builds, but you could still repair it next time you were in town and be just as strong as before. I'd like to see some more synergy in the Barbarian skills because while they're mostly pretty awesome, playing around on the skill calculator makes me feel like I could really pick any set at all and be pretty powerful. I get that they don't want optimal builds, but for there to be viable builds there also need to be at least a few non-viable builds. The Wizard does this better.

    Anyways, I'm not saying everyone who criticises is wrong, because there has been some decent analysis hidden in amongst the angst of these forums. Then again, keep in mind that anyone who says, "Blizzard has betrayed us all and we deserve their slavish obedience because we've been sitting on the internet for the last ten years waiting for this game," probably has someone who gets paid to take them for walks on a Thursday afternoon so they can buy their easybake pies without making a mess in the frozen foods aisle.
  • #34
    Quote from Alcovitch

    Lord_Jaroh

    I have no idea what you are talking about when you say this game doesn't have the "Diablo soul". I can tell you I felt right at home playing the beta and sunk way too many hours in it to be healthy and it's only a tiny fraction of the full game.

    Some of your graphics complains are simply a by product of moving from 2D sprite based game with a limited color palette to a 3D environment with a much broader color palette. Diablo 3 is no less "Dark" then it's predecessors. Dark doesn't specifically mean no light and all shadow, it' has to do with the ambiance and setting. There's plenty of Diablo in Diablo 3.


    I understand that some issues may be technical issues, however they are still issues, and I felt the need to bring them up. Others are more "nitpicky" as others would put it, but really, small issues or large issues, with the amount of polish that goes into Blizzard's games before they launch and the amount of time they spend on them, there should be no reason why they aren't "perfect" and able to satisfy those that are "happy with it" right now and those that "think it needs more...something". Really, if they added more ambience to the came, whether that be in the lighting or just simple things like the menu screens, how is that a bad thing?


    Quote from Azidonis

    Quote from Kazlan

    It kind of sounds like you want to play Diablo 2


    The way people make it appear, it almost sounds like D3 is nothing like D2... which is sad, because D2 was epic.

    As for the "watered down" parts... if it's too watered down and basic, I'm just going to stop playing it, really. I don't want watred down, I want Diablo 3... not a "Diablo-esque" version of WoW.

    Seriously, this game better live up to its expectations, or I know many people who will quite simply kick Blizzard ot the curb, like we have done with other gaming companies as of late (Bethesda, EA, 2K Sports, etc).


    I will say "game-play" is similar to Diablo II, but the general focus of Diablo III has shifted towards items and less to the character you are building to get those items. I don't find this a good change for Diablo as it changes the way you think about skills and "how" you play the game. I would have rather they shifted more the other way, more to the character building side.

    Watered-down? There does seem to be an over-abundance of catering to those that would have never played a Diablo game in the first place. Things like the constant tool-tips and hand-holding quest guiding and such. Hopefully these will be optional in the game, although I would rather them be "off" by default (I understand that this is just me, and that other people may want them, but in the nature of the previous games, why not have them off, and if you need help, you can turn them on? Some sort of "Easy Mode" that you can default to if you die too much?).

    I do find the change in the lore to be disconcerting, (ie. the removal of the Christian references) and the excuse that they gave a ham-handed reason to justify making it more "appealing" to a wider audience (the "Diablo has it's own mythology and we don't need the Christian references to prop it up" excuse). That I found was part of the ambience of Diablo from the beginning, and to not have that is jarring. Just like the change in font to remove the gothic feel to the letters. Not a change that I like, nor one that was necessary.

    There is somewhat of a Warcraft feel (not WoW, Warcraft 3) to the look of the game, and I chalk that up to using the same artists for the games. I dislike that choice, but I know that is something that will not change. I would have rather had a style that was more in line with Diablo's gothic feel, but that's me.

    I don't think the game will live up to expectations simply because the bar for the game has been set so high, it's unattainable by any game! I think a lot of people will "like it" at first, but I don't think it will have the longevity of its predecessor, and people will migrate to "new and better" games faster. Some of that will be a byproduct of the game itself, and some will be because the way Blizzard is treating it's customers as criminals before it launches (the online only aspect, and lack, no complete anti-modding stance), and for some it will be the shift in the attitudes of people now playing the game with a real money aspect to it.

    Quote from Argency

    Quote from Azidonis

    Quote from Kazlan

    It kind of sounds like you want to play Diablo 2


    The way people make it appear, it almost sounds like D3 is nothing like D2... which is sad, because D2 was epic.

    As for the "watered down" parts... if it's too watered down and basic, I'm just going to stop playing it, really. I don't want watred down, I want Diablo 3... not a "Diablo-esque" version of WoW.

    Seriously, this game better live up to its expectations, or I know many people who will quite simply kick Blizzard ot the curb, like we have done with other gaming companies as of late (Bethesda, EA, 2K Sports, etc).

    I wouldn't worry too much, the game is fine. It's not perfect in my books, but then again if it was it wouldn't be perfect in anyone else's books because everyone's books are slightly different. That's why I was a little surprised with his Lordship's wall-o-text. I've played the beta and, sure, it's not exactly how I would have made it, but then again it's very fun.


    Yes it's fun, but I think it has issues. My "Wall-o-text" as you put it is simply to point those that I found, from the small to the large. I don't want it to be "just fun". I want it to be "fun" and be a sequel to Diablo.

    For those of you who haven't gotten beta, here's a promising sign: there are some people raging, but they aren't really united in rage against any one particular feature of the game. Sure, some people don't like the new skill system, but from what I can see that's due to their own very narrow definition of build diversity, and it's not even like those people are in the majority amongst the h8ers. Some other people don't like the colour scheme and even if we accept that as a genuine criticism and not a big ridiculous joke that someone made up which somehow metastasized, those people are again the brave, the few, the raging. I could go on and on, but if we just keep in mind that the people who actually bother to make accounts on these forums are heavily skewed towards the superhardcore fans, some of whom must statistically be impossible to please or even carry on a sane conversation with, the fact that only a few nutters are saying "Blizzard had a brain anneurysm on this one and I'm never buying another one of their products ever again or even going to a country with a cold climate for fear of encountering a blizzard" is heartening.


    I agree that some people are being a little over-zealous in their "declarations of betrayal". But I also think there are a lot of people "drowning in the Blizzard Kool-Aid" as well. There are some people that won't accept any criticism of the game at all, whether valid or not, and think that if anyone brings up anything that detracts from "Blizzard's current vision" that they are crazy, and must fit in with the zealous nuts. The funny thing is, you seem to be dismissing *all* criticism as "raging" against Diablo III, and that those people must be "h8ters" rather than the "true fans" of the game...

    I'm not saying I love everything, or that there's nothing I could nitpick if I wanted to. That would be the other ridiculous extreme, and there are just as many nutjobs on here who have that opinion. I haven't bothered to make a thread about my criticisms because they're pretty minor. I'd like a bigger penalty for changing skills on the fly, like you take a hit to your durability or something. That'd be nice, because it'd create a real penalty that people would have to weigh against the benefit of changing builds, but you could still repair it next time you were in town and be just as strong as before. I'd like to see some more synergy in the Barbarian skills because while they're mostly pretty awesome, playing around on the skill calculator makes me feel like I could really pick any set at all and be pretty powerful. I get that they don't want optimal builds, but for there to be viable builds there also need to be at least a few non-viable builds. The Wizard does this better.


    And I think bringing up criticism now, before the game is finalized, is when you should be bringing anything up, so that Blizzard has a chance to fix that before it launches! Is there something "wrong" with criticism if it results in a better game? I see a lot of what is happening with DIII development to parallel the changes that were made in D&D 4th Ed. and considering the failure of that game, I don't want to see those development ideas causing DIII's downfall as well, especially when there is a chance to fix them first!

    Anyways, I'm not saying everyone who criticises is wrong, because there has been some decent analysis hidden in amongst the angst of these forums. Then again, keep in mind that anyone who says, "Blizzard has betrayed us all and we deserve their slavish obedience because we've been sitting on the internet for the last ten years waiting for this game," probably has someone who gets paid to take them for walks on a Thursday afternoon so they can buy their easybake pies without making a mess in the frozen foods aisle.


    And dismissing everyone's criticism's simply because "There can't be criticism of a Blizzard game! Those are just aesthetic nitpicks! Go play D2!" is probably a sign of someone who drinks a bit too much of the Kool-Aid for their own good...
  • #35
    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    The funny thing is, you seem to be dismissing *all* criticism as "raging" against Diablo III, and that those people must be "h8ters" rather than the "true fans" of the game...


    Quote from Argency

    I'm not saying I love everything, or that there's nothing I could nitpick if I wanted to. That would be the other ridiculous extreme, and there are just as many nutjobs on here who have that opinion.


    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    And dismissing everyone's criticism's simply because "There can't be criticism of a Blizzard game! Those are just aesthetic nitpicks! Go play D2!" is probably a sign of someone who drinks a bit too much of the Kool-Aid for their own good...


    Quote from Argency

    I'd like a bigger penalty for changing skills on the fly, like you take a hit to your durability or something. That'd be nice, because it'd create a real penalty that people would have to weigh against the benefit of changing builds, but you could still repair it next time you were in town and be just as strong as before. I'd like to see some more synergy in the Barbarian skills because while they're mostly pretty awesome, playing around on the skill calculator makes me feel like I could really pick any set at all and be pretty powerful. I get that they don't want optimal builds, but for there to be viable builds there also need to be at least a few non-viable builds. The Wizard does this better.


    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    ...dismissing *all* criticism...


    Just so it's extra clear, the bits where I was criticising the game are the grey bits. The burgundy/maroon parts are the background. The owl with the beard is my avatar, I stole it from a lady called Kate Beaton, she has a webcomic that is funny.

    Mind you, I never said you were one of the nutjobs who was raging. Your post actually seemed pretty mild-mannered compared to some others I've seen. My criticism of your post was that it was a huge post full of tiny aesthetic nitpicks. Somewhere up above I said that if they changed the game to make it perfect in my books it wouldn't be perfect in anyone else's because everyone's books are different. So, sure, Blizzard could change all those features you talked about but then everyone else in the beta would have just as many nitpicks of their own. If you take issue with stuff at that level then there can be at most one person in the world who is happy with the game.

    In response to your response to my response, if you'll read the two criticisms of the D3 beta that I've posted you'll note that they're neither rabid rage, nor pointless nitpicks. They are, however, criticisms. I don't think the game is terrible. I don't think it's perfect. I don't think all of my criticisms are important. I am looking forward to it coming out. I don't care if there are a few more delays. I am not trying to start a fight. :)
  • #36
    I'm just wondering how much Blizzard is holding back in the beta. At a mid to high level, D3 definitely feels like an old glove to me, in both a good and bad way. I feel right at home playing D3 which is good, but it feels more like an update than the next generation of Diablo. And I was running D3 on a stock Radeon HD 5770 smoothly at the maximum settings, so you definitely don't need a monster rig (at least in the beta).
  • #37
    Quote from ruhe

    I'm just wondering how much Blizzard is holding back in the beta. At a mid to high level, D3 definitely feels like an old glove to me, in both a good and bad way. I feel right at home playing D3 which is good, but it feels more like an update than the next generation of Diablo. And I was running D3 on a stock Radeon HD 5770 smoothly at the maximum settings, so you definitely don't need a monster rig (at least in the beta).


    there is no ultra option yet. but its not like that will be so much worse. they made the graphics like this on purpose, ppl need to realize that. its not that the graphics are "too old because production took too long" they went for a cartoonier look because making spells and everything look "realistic" would take insanely long and they would have to sacrifice gameplay. which Diablo is ALL about gameplay. gameplay > graphics.

    and blizzard IS holding back in the beta. they cut it apart and leave out a lot of lore and even quests to not spoil anything for release. they are hiding 47/48th of the game for christ sake.

    are they supposed to make an enitrely new game? its the NEXT game, not a "new generation game". when they make ANY sequal to ANY game they increase graphics,interface,mechanics remove some things, add some things. they dont rehaul the entire game and everything in it so its not even diablo anymore
    "once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
  • #38
    I don't think Blizzard has ever made a game that was challenging to a relatively up-to-date PC (I haven't play WoW since the beta, so maybe some of the expansions upped the ante).

    I totally get that the beta is very limited from a content perspective (quests, lore, etc.), but I just wonder how much of what we do see (gear, abilities, animations, etc.) are just place-holders versus the version that will actually make it into the game.

    And I'm definitely not saying that they should dump the Diablo formula, but it seems like they are playing it -very- safe (especially when you look at the differences between D1 and D2 and the amount of change that has occurred in PC gaming over the twelve years since D2).
  • #39
    Glad the wall-o-texters all found a thread they could all hang out on.
  • #40
    Quote from Argency

    Just so it's extra clear, the bits where I was criticising the game are the grey bits. The burgundy/maroon parts are the background. The owl with the beard is my avatar, I stole it from a lady called Kate Beaton, she has a webcomic that is funny.


    The colours didn't exactly come through on my end, but I understand perfectly what you were getting at.

    Mind you, I never said you were one of the nutjobs who was raging. Your post actually seemed pretty mild-mannered compared to some others I've seen. My criticism of your post was that it was a huge post full of tiny aesthetic nitpicks. Somewhere up above I said that if they changed the game to make it perfect in my books it wouldn't be perfect in anyone else's because everyone's books are different. So, sure, Blizzard could change all those features you talked about but then everyone else in the beta would have just as many nitpicks of their own. If you take issue with stuff at that level then there can be at most one person in the world who is happy with the game.


    No, you didn't, but you did imply with your earlier posts that my post was pointless (thus the picture you posted) as well as your dismissive and condescending attitude within the words you chose
    Sure, if you have some major point to make then I'm sure they (and we) would all be interested to hear, but this stuff? If you have a degree in video design (and seriously, what are the odds that you're both a Lord and a video designer?
    and
    is just way out of proportion with the amount that I (or any reasonable person) care/s about that very minor detail
    amongst others makes me believe that you are one to talk down to others to make your own position seem "better" and by default "more correct". This may not be what you meant to say, but it is certainly how you portrayed yourself.

    In response to your response to my response, if you'll read the two criticisms of the D3 beta that I've posted you'll note that they're neither rabid rage, nor pointless nitpicks. They are, however, criticisms. I don't think the game is terrible. I don't think it's perfect. I don't think all of my criticisms are important. I am looking forward to it coming out. I don't care if there are a few more delays. I am not trying to start a fight. :)



    I am also not looking to start a fight. I just take issue with people that dismiss others' opinions out of hand and state their own opinions as superior, maybe not in words directly, but in the tone of the post. If that was not your intention, then we can move on from this bickering. :)

    Quote from Gheed2010

    Glad the wall-o-texters all found a thread they could all hang out on.

    This wall of text is far too short to be in this thread. :)
  • #41
    I´ve also played beta and what i disliked the MOST of ALL is the following:
    1: It shows your DPS instead of Damage. I know that alot of people here thinks that damage and dps is the same thing. The difference is. DPS = Damage Per SECOND. Damage: Your TOTAL damage. So seeing 15 dps makes you think...bah i want to see my damage, this sucks. Either remove "DPS" or add Damage as well or Diablo 3 will fail.
  • #42
    Quote from robinjohnsson

    I´ve also played beta and what i disliked the MOST of ALL is the following:
    1: It shows your DPS instead of Damage. I know that alot of people here thinks that damage and dps is the same thing. The difference is. DPS = Damage Per SECOND. Damage: Your TOTAL damage. So seeing 15 dps makes you think...bah i want to see my damage, this sucks. Either remove "DPS" or add Damage as well or Diablo 3 will fail.


    I agree, the DPS stat just seems too...metagaming within the game, or something. I don't know. I would rather have you figure out through trail and error which weapon is better for your character. As well, the size of the font makes it stand out too much. If anything, make it the same size as the rest of the stats on the weapon.
  • #43
    Quote from Lord_Jaroh

    Quote from robinjohnsson

    I´ve also played beta and what i disliked the MOST of ALL is the following:
    1: It shows your DPS instead of Damage. I know that alot of people here thinks that damage and dps is the same thing. The difference is. DPS = Damage Per SECOND. Damage: Your TOTAL damage. So seeing 15 dps makes you think...bah i want to see my damage, this sucks. Either remove "DPS" or add Damage as well or Diablo 3 will fail.


    I agree, the DPS stat just seems too...metagaming within the game, or something. I don't know. I would rather have you figure out through trail and error which weapon is better for your character. As well, the size of the font makes it stand out too much. If anything, make it the same size as the rest of the stats on the weapon.


    Seriously? This is really nitpicking at nothing.
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes