Diablo 3 Rage!

  • #41
    In short: Internet is getting bigger and wider. That means more idiots are online everywhere.
    It's logical.

    In my opinion, I do not care about ragers, I just do not read all the text, if any at all. And even if someone should write something angry to me I just ignore it actually. I mean, it's not like stupid people can win by arguing.. That's not logical.

    And.. I really like Diablo 3. Super happy they are updating it and add more stuff, it's awesome!

    Swedish Official Fansite www.Diablo3pvp.se

  • #42
    Quote from Indimix

    Quote from ruksak

    Quote from shaggy

    12 million units were purchased (some through the Annual Pass). That suggests that at least 12 million people don't care about "online only" enough for it to keep them from buying the game.

    Yep...true true...


    What that suggests is that 12 million people bought the damn game knowing full-well that it IS NOT off-line, nor ever will be. To me, that statistic, goes far to back my point that most people would pick a clean and integral online only, as opposed to having both offline and online and having both be hacked/duped to shit.

    I am not wrong. For me to be wrong, someone would have to explain 12 million people buying an online only game.

    Dude.. you are making up so much assumptions that my assumptions meter is out the charts!!... seriously, read again what you typed.

    I think your comprehension issues are arising from the obvious fact that English isn't your first language. Not meaning to insult, but, It appears to be the case.

    12 million people bought D3 knowing darn well that it's online only. Most people living in 1st world nations have internet access in their homes. 100% of all people whom bought D3, have internet service. So why....why would we want offline? To be isolated? To play alone, untouched by influence of other players?

    One could do that online as well. The only times one cannot play would be the few hours of maintenance every Tuesday and any other localized internet service disruption......something that would be extremely rare for most players.

    So who wants the offline mode? Whom are these people and why do they demand offline mode for a PC game in this internet age? Other than the above mentioned minority of folks whom just simply want a loners experience, the rest of the people whom want, no, DEMAND an offline mode are going to be the collective of assholes whom just want to dupe/hack and fuck the rest of our online experience up when their illicit activities creep into our world.
    BurningRope#1322
  • #43
    Quote from Indimix

    Quote from Melt

    Quote from maka

    I wrote this big text, then deleted it all, because this is enough: I don't need constant patching to enjoy a game. In fact, I don't know how and when this notion crept up on us. If the game is well designed from the start, with the user's enjoyment as its foremost objective, occasional patches (mostly fixing stuff, instead of adding new stuff) and one or two well planned and fleshed out x-packs will be plenty. And those are paid expansions, anyway, so they should be able to stand on their own feet, financially, and not, like you say, supported by 'other means'.
    If box sales of the game + expansions aren't enough to sustain the occasional addition of content, then just stick to fixing things you screwed up (bugs) and let the users generate the content. I'd rather they do that than pull stunts like RMAH + online only, day-1 DLC, non-cosmetic microtransactions, etc. (not saying Blizzard does all of these, just naming a few of these slimy schemes).
    Offline/internet play + user-generated content beats online-only + developer-generated content any day.

    That's it. I'm done.


    I still don't understand how this "they are greedy" argument works. If the user's enjoyment wasn't the top priority what was? If they made the RMAH to grab as much money as possible wouldn't it have been much better to keep everybody as appealed as possible? Or are guys like you so supersmart that they you can see through the scam and therefore have to voice this "careful they want your money!" - opinion over and over again.
    I mean creating additional charms, runes and jewels and gems and runestones could have granted them many more transactions. And if you add "Zod" runes and 20/17 charms and whatnot they could have made sooo much more money. So why didn't they do it? Could have kept everybody happy AND make more money. Why would they miss out on that?

    It's just a business model, and like they said about how the AH impacted the game, they had"mixed feelings" about it.

    The auctionhouse is shit and is a huge factor to why people are so discouraged when playing. However, it is not the RMAH that's the problem, it is the GAH. You can leave the RMAH as is, since it's merely a shortcut for those who want to pay for items on 3d party sites. The problems come from the GAH and how people are unable to realize on their own that not finding personal loot is not fun. The people that think it's necessary to compete in this PvE game and start buying items on the GAH. Items they haven't earned the slightest bit. I played 300 hours and i barely have 1 trifecta item and guess what, I think itemization isn't nearly as horrible as people suggest

    If anything but a Zod-rune drop becomes trivial and unusable you shouldn't be surprised the game got boring for you...
  • #44
    Quote from maka

    I wrote this big text, then deleted it all, because this is enough: I don't need constant patching to enjoy a game. In fact, I don't know how and when this notion crept up on us. If the game is well designed from the start, with the user's enjoyment as its foremost objective, occasional patches (mostly fixing stuff, instead of adding new stuff) and one or two well planned and fleshed out x-packs will be plenty.

    Even the best games get old with time. Without significant support and change, people stop playing. Not that the developers of Diablo 3 wished for it to be fresh and new for all time, forever. They have simply started D3 with the logistics to do so in theory. Signalling to the masses that for however long the player plays, he/she will not have to be burdened by the same content for years and years.

    And those are paid expansions, anyway, so they should be able to stand on their own feet, financially, and not, like you say, supported by 'other means'.

    This is simple. With an x-pac comes new balancing issues, glitches and potentially great ideas to expand microcosmically upon the retailed x-pac. To support an x-pac, the developers need a consistent flow of income. We only got 1 x-pac from D2 because there was no stream of new income, nothing significant to excuse such.
    The monies garnered from x-pac sales would clearly not be enough to finance full, long time support. Maybe if they launched the x-pac without desire for profit, but what company would do this?

    This is a business, after all. I wouldn't expect Blizz to launch into 5-10 years of support for a game that they ceased generating significant revenue on so many years ago. The RMAH is CLEARLY a long term plan for support. Anyone whom sees otherwise is either lying out of spite or wholly ignorant and biased toward the matter.

    Offline/internet play + user-generated content beats online-only + developer-generated content any day.

    "Offline play + user-generated content beats online-only"..........doing that would create the same hacks/dupes we suffered through with D2. User generated content includes hacks/dupes. Open that door and they just straight fucked 12 million people. This matter is a case of user generated content vs the integrity of the game. You cannot have both. One or the other, I feel Blizz choose wisely.
    BurningRope#1322
  • #45

    "Offline play + user-generated content beats online-only"..........doing that would create the same hacks/dupes we suffered through with D2. User generated content includes hacks/dupes. Open that door and they just straight fucked 12 million people. This matter is a case of user generated content vs the integrity of the game. You cannot have both. One or the other, I feel Blizz choose wisely.

    +1

    Torchlight 2 has released the client and even gave an editor to people. Do you see people playing Torchlight 2 constantly? Personally, i even think torchlight 1 and 2 have the best innovation and systems and potential of any ARPG, but fml are people stupid and horribly bad at unlocking this hidden potential.
  • #46
    First of all I think Diablo 3 is a great game, but the one thing I hate is the auction house. For example, once a person hits 60 they can go to the Auction House and buy 80 million gold for like 20 dollars, then buy the best gear they can afford with that 80 million gold. The sad thing is that person who just hit 60 and got geared out hasn't played a single level of inferno, and is already better than half the people playing the game.
  • #47
    Quote from Wylo

    First of all I think Diablo 3 is a great game, but the one thing I hate is the auction house. For example, once a person hits 60 they can go to the Auction House and buy 80 million gold for like 20 dollars, then buy the best gear they can afford with that 80 million gold. The sad thing is that person who just hit 60 and got geared out hasn't played a single level of inferno, and is already better than half the people playing the game.

    The same thing happened in D2, with all the dupes and 3rd party sites selling items. A few months after I started playing D2, I was in some public trading game, some dude joins and drops about a hundred SoJs. BOOM, another dent in the economy and a few noobs could suddenly afford to kit out 5 chars in endgame gear. I didn't join the party, but it was there.

    Also, look at it this way: my DH is pretty adequately kitted out and can handle Inferno on the highest MPs. Now, if I really felt like rolling a wizard instead, I wouldn't have to spend hours/days to trade my gear into wiz gear. I could just sell it on AH and then buy wiz gear! Magics! Maybe people with more time on their hands don't agree and would prefer the player interaction, which is fine by me. There's still trades going on! Personally I wouldn't want to go back to the D2 dark ages, where you had to delete your gold because you went over cap on the hour. I like the fact that the ingame currency is still worth something.
  • #48
    Complaint: D3 is online only! WTF!!
    Question: Has anyone complaining about online only bought the game expecting otherwise? If this was such a big mistake, why did you buy the game? D2 had an offline mode, but who actually played offline single player only? I know I didn't. When i played D2 "single player" I played on battle.net in a solo game. Why? Because if i ever wanted to play online with my friends i could play with the same characters and not have to start fresh again if i didn't want to. Sure the option was there but who really used it? I didn't, and no one I played with ever did. Yes that is a small sample of people who played D2, so i'm throwing the question out there. Who used D2's offline single player mode and why? I genuinely would like to know who did, and why.

    Complaint: RMAH ruined the game! Pay to win sucks!
    Question: Are you forced to use the RMAH? I personally don't like the RMAH because i don't like pay to win. Not because i think its immoral for a company to take money off the top(charging money for a service? This is wrong....how?) I don't like pay to win because... its boring. If i was made of money, i could drop a hundred bucks, maybe more, and have the best of the best gear and steamroll Inferno MP10... but, why would I do that? Whats the point? To get better gear? Oh wait, i have the best gear already. I bought it. To see the rest of the story? Wait no, i already have seen the story on countless runs. There's nothing in the game i have to pay to see. Not one sliver of content not available to everyone for the price of the game alone. Absolutely nothing. So whats the point of using the RMAH? For me i don't see a point. I also don't see anything wrong with it existing. If you dont like it, don't use it.


    Does D3 have issues? absolutely. Itemization could be a LOT better and more interesting. Drop rates are too low and progressing in improving your character seems to be too slow to me, but I still enjoy the game. Are there other issues, of course, are they getting resolved? I don't know, but i do know they are improving as time goes on and updates are released.
  • #49
    To retarded people claiming RMAH is a tool to add to player convenience and not a way for Blizzard to make money:

    how STUPID can you get? I won't go into any depth here. I'll just mention:

    1 euro tax, 1.25 euro minimum auction (safe to say over 90% of all auctions go for min price nowadays, and the trend will likely remain). That's if you only use Battle.net balance, you get 20%!!!!! of the sum and 80%!!!!! goes to Blizzard. Now if you want that money actually usable and transferred to paypal, you lose ANOTHER 15% (not sure of which sum, starting or the remaining? not that big a difference tho) that AGAIN goes to Blizzard. So in most cases of using AH, 85-90% of the sum goes to Blizzard.

    And you're telling me there are people retarded enough to think it's in the game for players? I think I just lost the little faith I had left in this world.
  • #50
    Quote from maka

    Offline/internet play + user-generated content beats online-only + developer-generated content any day.

    Yup. That's what I'm trying to say, but apparently my point ain't getting through.

    Quote from AnEvilForce

    Quote from m4st0d0n

    How do you know what does the majority want? You don't know. Your argument is invalid.
    But even with the theoretical(!) hack free online mode, what's wrong with an extra offline/custom mode?
    Diablo 2's legacy, I'm afraid. things were a bit chaotic with Soj, rune and ITH dupes.

    That was Diablo 2 online. While I understand that a lot of you come from that perspective, please understand that a whole lot of people didn't and don't care about battle.net (or any other walled garden).

    Online only and strict licensing took away one degree of freedom. We can't even use mods like darkd3 without risking our purchase. That's wrong.

    You might be okay with that. But stop thinking that your opinions apply to us all.
  • #51
    Quote from Fish

    To retarded people claiming RMAH is a tool to add to player convenience and not a way for Blizzard to make money:

    how STUPID can you get?

    You took that comment out of context, and made yourself look stupid.

    The discussion was about whether or not RMAH revenues finance Diablo 3 service and/or development. My argument is that retail/online sales cover that with great profit, and RMAH is just an extra convenience/safety feature - and as such, every profit it generates comes as a premium to Blizzard Activision, like you said. And, of course, it wouldn't have been implemented if there was no profit in it for Blizzard.
  • #52
    Quote from m4st0d0n

    Quote from AnEvilForce

    Quote from m4st0d0n

    How do you know what does the majority want? You don't know. Your argument is invalid.
    But even with the theoretical(!) hack free online mode, what's wrong with an extra offline/custom mode?
    Diablo 2's legacy, I'm afraid. things were a bit chaotic with Soj, rune and ITH dupes.

    That was Diablo 2 online. While I understand that a lot of you come from that perspective, please understand that a whole lot of people didn't and don't care about battle.net (or any other walled garden).

    Online only and strict licensing took away one degree of freedom. We can't even use mods like darkd3 without risking our purchase. That's wrong.

    You might be okay with that. But stop thinking that your opinions apply to us all.

    This is 2012, not 1999.

    If you want an offline-only game, feel free to dust off your Sega Genesis and fire up Sonic the Hedgehog. While you're busy living in the past the rest of us have realized that this internet thing is here to stay and that EVERY developer is busy utilizing it, including those Grinding Gear Game heathens. PoE is online-only. I've yet to see a single person QQ on their forums about it.

    It's only Diablo "fans" who would whine about this because Diablo "fans" are the shittiest fans on the internet and aren't happy unless they're complaining about something.
    65.3k elite kills :: 1.94m total kills :: p235
    Planet Express <PlanEx>
    (V) (°,,°) (V)
  • #53
    The online only requirement is fun when you live close to the servers and your internet connection is flawless. Otherwise, you will have (like I do) a constant 200ms latency and internet problems here and there. My internet connection is quite good and stable, but I cant avoid having a fixed minimum latency, which ruins the experience.

    As you see, you are not thinking of players outside US.
  • #54
    Quote from Indimix

    The online only requirement is fun when you live close to the servers and your internet connection is flawless. Otherwise, you will have (like I do) a constant 200ms latency and internet problems here and there. My internet connection is quite good and stable, but I cant avoid having a fixed minimum latency, which ruins the experience.

    As you see, you are not thinking of players outside US.

    This is actually and absolutely valid point against online requirement. I don't think anyone in Northern America or Europe can complain about the D3 online policy because almost everyone is online almost all the time and has a good connection (yeah I know there are exceptions, but it's rare). But having lived in two countries (different continents) where latency is constantly 200-500ms (or worse) and speed is so slow that surfing websites feels like we're back in the dial-up 90s, I know how you feel. Very valid point. Unfortunately... Blizzard didn't care about you. As much as I defend them, in this case they were just centered on developing for US/EU/the well-connected parts of Asia.
  • #55
    Quote from Melt

    Torchlight 2 has released the client and even gave an editor to people. Do you see people playing Torchlight 2 constantly? Personally, i even think torchlight 1 and 2 have the best innovation and systems and potential of any ARPG, but fml are people stupid and horribly bad at unlocking this hidden potential.

    Ironically, TL2's editor seems to be taking only slightly less time that D3's PvP to arrive. Current mods have been made entirely via community efforts in reverse-engineering file formats.

    Moreover, there's no technical reason why Blizzard couldn't have made an offline, mod-friendly D3 and kept the online mode AH/RMAH-safe version as well... but it would have taken an enormous amount of effort for what seems to be a fairly small return.
  • #56
    From a game developer point of view, I don't think that having an offline mode would be any difficult, just change the url to where you are sending the request to... your own PC, and make that mode completely independent from the online only mode.
  • #57
    Quote from Indimix

    From a game developer point of view, I don't think that having an offline mode would be any difficult, just change the url to where you are sending the request to... your own PC, and make that mode completely independent from the online only mode.

    That'd be trivial, but a total security time-bomb as you'd have to ship the game-server with the game, exposing the bare, vulnerable binary to the baleful glare of hackers.

    To keep their official servers as hack-free for as long as possible, they would have had to write a completely different 'local' server binary that managed all the mob AI, item generation and character persistence but shared no code or protocols with their official one. Hell, make it backed by plain text data files and a 3rd-party scripting language for maximum modability. I'd be amazed if that kind of effort could recoup event 1% of the dev cost, though.
  • #58
    Quote from Catalept

    Quote from Indimix

    From a game developer point of view, I don't think that having an offline mode would be any difficult, just change the url to where you are sending the request to... your own PC, and make that mode completely independent from the online only mode.

    That'd be trivial, but a total security time-bomb as you'd have to ship the game-server with the game, exposing the bare, vulnerable binary to the baleful glare of hackers.

    To keep their official servers as hack-free for as long as possible, they would have had to write a completely different 'local' server binary that managed all the mob AI, item generation and character persistence but shared no code or protocols with their official one. Hell, make it backed by plain text data files and a 3rd-party scripting language for maximum modability. I'd be amazed if that kind of effort could recoup event 1% of the dev cost, though.

    People refuse to accept this. The minority of folks that want an offline mode don't give a shit if that would ruin the integrity of the online game for the rest of us. I honestly feel that most of the people whom are pissed about no offline mode are the same people that hacked and duped Diablo 2 to shit.
    BurningRope#1322
  • #59
    Quote from ruksak

    People refuse to accept this. The minority of folks that want an offline mode don't give a shit if that would ruin the integrity of the online game for the rest of us. I honestly feel that most of the people whom are pissed about no offline mode are the same people that hacked and duped Diablo 2 to shit.

    I think you're going a bit too far. It's just that not everyone is a programmer, and unless you know how it's done you can't estimate how easy it is to disassemble game files if both client and server are at your fingertips. So some people just don't think about this. I was gonna write the same what Catalept wrote, but I thought it had been mentioned before several times... well, maybe not often enough. Offline mode would mean they'd have to code a completely new, second backbone for the game.
  • #60
    Quote from Bagstone

    I think you're going a bit too far. It's just that not everyone is a programmer, and unless you know how it's done you can't estimate how easy it is to disassemble game files if both client and server are at your fingertips. So some people just don't think about this. I was gonna write the same what Catalept wrote, but I thought it had been mentioned before several times... well, maybe not often enough. Offline mode would mean they'd have to code a completely new, second backbone for the game.

    Perhaps when I said "most of the people" it was a bit misleading. However, it only serves to make sense that a sizable sample of the people up in arms over 'online only' are going to be people whom only saw "fun" in Diablo when they were cheating, hacking and duping.

    The logic holds up. Of course exactly zero people will admit to it, but we all know that there was a huge contingent of people whom cheated in Diablo 2 via exploiting the offline client. Obviously these people weren't thrilled by the idea that if they play Diablo 3, they have to do so legit, at least up to the point where bots are involved.






    .
    BurningRope#1322
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes