GG

  • #21
    Not that I care about PvP but... What's the problem with releasing TDM which "will become boring in a few hours/days" and continue with brainstorming/implementing something more cool in terms of PvP instead of scrapping it completely to come up with something more cool in terms of PvP. I mean people would be upset anyway - isn't it better to get them upset over *something* instead of nothing at all?
  • #22
    Quote from overneathe

    Quote from yoshiboi

    Where do you get your info from dude? Sigh......Blizzard merged with activision....so yes we can compare them as companies. They are both greedy.

    Secondly, WoW has progressive content because it is a subcription based game...unlike CoD & Diablo 3. Do you know why CoD is so small of a game on every release? The graphics and dynamic mechanics put into the game are huge. I agree it's kindy crappy but it's the way it is. Atleast when you buy CoD you know what the game has to offer. I bought Diablo 3 in the hopes for PvP, mainly Team Death match. Ya it sucked that on release Blizzard said PvP wasn't ready. Being a big fan of the Diablo franchise and Blizzard as a whole, I decided to wait. Now Blizzard stated that Team detah match will probably never exist. Fail? False advertising?

    Diablo 3 was fun for the first few months, even when you put aside all the nerfs. But the game lacks content, ie: more activites like daily quests or group encounters. This is suppose to be a sequel to the Diablo series.......then why does Diablo 2 have more content? Blind fans calling people haters or whinners but the sad truth is that the list of problems with Diablo 3 keeps getting bigger. I used to be a blind fan but not anymore.

    The sad truth is that Diablo 3 falls short, a broken game indeed. GG Blizzard.

    Activision and Blizzard didn't decide to merge. Blizzard's parent company Vivendi bought Activision and then merged it with Blizzard. Vivendi is calling the shots on both of them, while it has been calling the shots for Blizzard for the last 15 years. Where do you get your info from?!

    CoD runs the same engine for years with small tweaks added each year for each game. The only truly new things are some textures/models and a few pieces of code. It's a recycle process each year that costs Activision almost nothing and brings in huge profits.

    I'm not as disappointed as you are that PvP has not made it yet, though I wont hide that I am indeed at least a bit disappointed, mainly because exactly people like you that wanted it badly didn't get it. It's sad, but it's what it is right now. And I can tell you right now that Team Deathmatch is likely 99% sure to not come. Blizz said themselves they'll be looking at other options. TD just happened to not feel fun for them on the long run. Do I trust them? I don't sadly care enough about the topic to trust them. I've avoided PvP in every game and have no idea how fun team deathmatch could've been. But it's a scrapped project. We'll not be seeing it (likely). If PvP is the only thing that you wanted in Diablo then either start looking around for other games or at least shelve D3 for now and follow the news to see when and how exactly PvP will reemerge.

    I don't think the list of problems of Diablo 3 is getting bigger. I think it's getting a lot smaller. What has gotten worse since the game came out? The problems that are still present have indeed been here since launch, but which of them have actually gotten worse?

    Also, look at the other point of view. Most people (including me and you) think the game has gotten nerfed. A topic just next to this one, created by a long time Diablo 2 fan, says that the game needs to be nerfed more... ?! Oh, yes, it's opinions.

    Daily quests? One of the worst things I've heard for a hack and slash, likely in my entire life. Also, all hack and slash RPGs offer team play, but they _never_ add things that you can't do solo. That's maybe one of the most core features in these types of games. I really don't understand what exactly you're looking for in this game.

    They didn't merged, they merged.... you just contradicted yourself there. Also you're being inductive with the chart i showed that blizzard posted.
  • #23
    Er.. it wasn't their decision to merge? Their parent company merged them? So now instead of Blizzard taking orders from Activision as the majority of haters call it, Activision is taking orders from the company that Blizzard has been taking orders from for the last 15 years. You see no difference in this?

    And what about your chart? Didn't understand your statement.
  • #24
    Quote from overneathe

    Er.. it wasn't their decision to merge? Their parent company merged them? So now instead of Blizzard taking orders from Activision as the majority of haters call it, Activision is taking orders from the company that Blizzard has been taking orders from for the last 15 years. You see no difference in this?

    And what about your chart? Didn't understand your statement.

    Partly true, i think the main issue that people have is Mr. Kotick and that he became the president and CEO of this merger and presides over the parent company Actiblizz: http://activisionblizzard.com/bobby-kotick

    What many people fail to understand is blizzard still has creative freedom of their franchises and remained autonomous after the merger, Blizz does however have to answer to its parent company based on sales, future plans, bla bla bla, but as far as they're concerned blizzard are doing quite well in this department (More than well actually!).
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes