I'll get stomped at BGH and Angry Birds on a professional level too. Because I never play those games, and someone out there is playing 24/7.
But this doesn't mean that DOTA is any more complex than your simpleton flash games.
The only reason DOTA caught on is because people liked Warcraft 3, but were too newb to control units and 2/3 heroes. Just give them one hero to control and they'll have more fun.
DOTA is about as complex as a web based flash game and it is fine for newbs (people new to video games). Angry birds is popular too, but it is ridiculous to suggest Blizzard implement things from these popular newb(people new to video games) games because they are popular.
I don't really care about your opinion of DOTA or Angry Birds. Point being is that they are a game for newbs (people new to video games) and shouldn't be inspiration for Diablo 3.
DOTA not supersimplified? Non-newbs playing DOTA(except as a joke)?
You're trolling me. They are both super-popular custom games designed specifically to be newb friendly, and both of these custom games dominated the custom game scene. They both did huge damage to their respective games, but Blizzard supported both anyways.
DOTA was the BGH of Warcraft3. Millions of people enjoy it. But millions enjoy pokemon. That doesn't mean I would suggest that Blizzard add a turn based PvP mode. That would be idiotic.
Comparing DotA to BGH is just silly, it's really nothing like that.. DotA differs so much from the original gameplay of WC3 that it even spawned the sub-genre that now has several games. BGH actually "pretended" to be "real" Starcraft when it actually just made things easier for people who didn't want to learn and cope with the challenge of playing with limited resources. I don't really get your comparison.
It was a super-simplified game type that only newbs played. It filled the custom game list because every newb wanted to play it and it became so popular eventually Blizzard supported it.
What am I talking about... BGH or DOTA?
And Pokemon? Why are you even bringing that in here? Yes, adding a turn based PvP mode in an action oriented game such as Diablo 3 would probably be idiotic, but that's off the point of this thread.
Not really. He mentioned that a valid reason to emulate DOTA style PvP was because "millions of people liked it". I was just showing him how idiotic that point was.
Problem is your freely allowed to participate in the acquiring of Achievements Blizzard isn't telling you to do anything, they are simply giving you more things to do in the game.
Achievements don't give you more things to do in game. If they removed achievements you could still do each and every action required for the achievements. But you would not get joy out of them because they joy is derived from completing a task sole because someone told you to do it.
You could use your exact same argument for anything in game, why kill that mob? because Blizzard told you that if you kill it you might get a pretty orange item! oh wow I'm going to go do that now, thanks Blizzard!
I disagree. My argument is that the only joy you get from an achievement is the fact that you completed a task that someone else told you to complete. If there were no achievements, you could still complete these tasks on your own. If you consider this achievement-free approach to not be fun, then the fun from achievements is derived from actually completing a task that someone else told you to complete, not simply completing the task.
I see it as, I was doing all these actions anyway, so why not get recognition for doing them to further increase my enjoyment for doing them. Blizzard isn't tell me to kill 1000 elites because they provide me with some flashy lights when I do it, Blizzard is giving me flashy lights because I finally reached the 1000 elite I was going to already kill. a good majority of people don't play the game to receive the achievements, they do the achievements while playing the game, thats the difference.
So unless you play the game purely to do the achievements, you are not being told what to do.
I agree with your purpose of achievements. Basically a log book, counting the things you've done. I'd rather have an expansive log book that keeps track of everything.
Though some achievements I'm sure won't be accomplished unless you specifically try for them. And there will be some that would eventually be achieved but some want to get it done ASAP.
I don't care if they are in the game, but I do hope that they integrate achievements into the public game UI. Similar to joining a game where players doing the same quest as you, you could join a game where players are doing the same achievement as you.
Problem is your freely allowed to participate in the acquiring of Achievements Blizzard isn't telling you to do anything, they are simply giving you more things to do in the game.
Achievements don't give you more things to do in game. If they removed achievements you could still do each and every action required for the achievements. But you would not get joy out of them because they joy is derived from completing a task sole because someone told you to do it.
You could use your exact same argument for anything in game, why kill that mob? because Blizzard told you that if you kill it you might get a pretty orange item! oh wow I'm going to go do that now, thanks Blizzard!
I disagree. My argument is that the only joy you get from an achievement is the fact that you completed a task that someone else told you to complete. If there were no achievements, you could still complete these tasks on your own. If you consider this achievement-free approach to not be fun, then the fun from achievements is derived from actually completing a task that someone else told you to complete, not simply completing the task.
I think you'd be better putting your point in a slightly less abusive and more constructive manner.
What would you call someone who does something only because someone told them to do it, any the only reason they get joy out of doing it is because someone told them to do it?
This sounds like my dog. He loves to roll over, but only if I tell him to do it.
I think you'd be better putting your point in a slightly less abusive and more constructive manner.
Fair enough. What would you call them? What do you call someone who does a task solely because someone else told them to do it, and the only reason they consider that task to be fun is because someone told them to do it?
Maybe a dog? That is how my dog behaves, doing what I said for no other reason than because I said to do it, and he gets joy out of it only when I tell him to do it, not when he does it without suggestion.
Achivements are inferior to a Log Book in every way imaginable. Instead of it giving you an Achievment for doing something X times, just have a Log Book that records how many times you have done X.
I haven't heard anything about a Log Book, which surprises me because of how obviously superior it is.
*Smoreschanpps joins Skeleton King Run.
Group gets to skeleton king, Smoreschanpps is the only person attacking
Smoreschanpps says "Why aren't you guys attacking?"
Group says "We are trying to get Instant Karma achievment! Let skeleton king kill his own minions noob!"
Acheivments do one thing, and one thing only to non-retards: Make public games less enjoyable. Retards will be trying to do the meaningless achievements like Instant Karma or whatever idiotic achievements they imagine.
Achievements are for retarded monkeys who happen to play games. "BLIZZARD TOLD ME TO RUN IN CIRCLES FOR AN HOUR AND I DID IT... ACHIEVEMENT!" Apparently retarded monkeys buy a lot of games.
I don't see the need for side mouse buttons in D3. No WASD movement means your left hand is free, and only 6 skills means you don't need to assign many hotkeys. And besides how does clicking mouse buttons with your thumb/ring/pinkie finger not hinder mouse movement? I move the mouse with my thumb/ring/pinky finger...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Only an idiot would pay $40 for a flash drive.
But this doesn't mean that DOTA is any more complex than your simpleton flash games.
The only reason DOTA caught on is because people liked Warcraft 3, but were too newb to control units and 2/3 heroes. Just give them one hero to control and they'll have more fun.
I don't really care about your opinion of DOTA or Angry Birds. Point being is that they are a game for newbs (people new to video games) and shouldn't be inspiration for Diablo 3.
You're trolling me. They are both super-popular custom games designed specifically to be newb friendly, and both of these custom games dominated the custom game scene. They both did huge damage to their respective games, but Blizzard supported both anyways.
It was a super-simplified game type that only newbs played. It filled the custom game list because every newb wanted to play it and it became so popular eventually Blizzard supported it.
What am I talking about... BGH or DOTA?
Not really. He mentioned that a valid reason to emulate DOTA style PvP was because "millions of people liked it". I was just showing him how idiotic that point was.
I agree with your purpose of achievements. Basically a log book, counting the things you've done. I'd rather have an expansive log book that keeps track of everything.
Though some achievements I'm sure won't be accomplished unless you specifically try for them. And there will be some that would eventually be achieved but some want to get it done ASAP.
I don't care if they are in the game, but I do hope that they integrate achievements into the public game UI. Similar to joining a game where players doing the same quest as you, you could join a game where players are doing the same achievement as you.
I disagree. My argument is that the only joy you get from an achievement is the fact that you completed a task that someone else told you to complete. If there were no achievements, you could still complete these tasks on your own. If you consider this achievement-free approach to not be fun, then the fun from achievements is derived from actually completing a task that someone else told you to complete, not simply completing the task.
What would you call someone who does something only because someone told them to do it, any the only reason they get joy out of doing it is because someone told them to do it?
This sounds like my dog. He loves to roll over, but only if I tell him to do it.
Fair enough. What would you call them? What do you call someone who does a task solely because someone else told them to do it, and the only reason they consider that task to be fun is because someone told them to do it?
Maybe a dog? That is how my dog behaves, doing what I said for no other reason than because I said to do it, and he gets joy out of it only when I tell him to do it, not when he does it without suggestion.
I haven't heard anything about a Log Book, which surprises me because of how obviously superior it is.
*Smoreschanpps joins Skeleton King Run.
Group gets to skeleton king, Smoreschanpps is the only person attacking
Smoreschanpps says "Why aren't you guys attacking?"
Group says "We are trying to get Instant Karma achievment! Let skeleton king kill his own minions noob!"
Acheivments do one thing, and one thing only to non-retards: Make public games less enjoyable. Retards will be trying to do the meaningless achievements like Instant Karma or whatever idiotic achievements they imagine.