If you take the time to read it, it explains about the origin of the universe, and the galactic pearl that sets the whole in motion.
It also speaks of Anu and Tathamet, primordial and opposing forces, of whom angels and demons descend.
Heavy stuff here, so, take some time to read it, suck it in, then share you opinion.
This looks like It's probally the Book of Cain, so I opted not to read it(since I plan on buying the book), but neverless cool find.
what I don't understand is that there is maybe 5+ hours of content, the graphics are outdates and they need 6 months of public testing? seriously I don;t understand what is taking so damn long, its a bit rediculous huge good titles like Modern Warfare,tera, torchlight 2 batman AC, skyrim which was announced last year is being released way before blizz releases this 5+ hour non mmorpg? like seriously what are they slow pacing this project for? just release now its fine the way it is! Just patch it up real easy right? No, there gonna have a beta test with limited players.... what is blizz thinking seriously, are they just being nice to other game companys to make sales before they release this game? by the time the winds set no one is gonna care about D3 they will be playing TERA, SWTOR, modern warfare, and torchlight. this is a bad move blizz hurry up and release this game there is no need to push it back another 4 months this is rediculous you guys do this for every game SC2 took 7 years and people played it once then stopped something tells me you guys are getting lazy, hell WoW was released earlier than D3! this is absolute B.S. who agrees?
Lol so true, they have serious time management issues, combined with the fact, personally I think they don't even want to make non WoW titled games anymore, which is why it has that lazy feel to it(clear evidence is that somehow a very small multiplayer game, took way more then any MMO would ever take, nevermind other non MMO games, yet alot of the systems are over simplified, which should have made it a very easy game to make), but due to the fact the Diablo series is what built Blizzard in the first place, followed by SC, they feel they have no choice.
41% "Yes" in an diablo fansite ? In diablofans (the site with the lowest amaount of trolls and biggest amount of fanboys) ?
Creepy!
There are 340 active members in just the last hour yet only 236ish have voted. It's a very small number of votes for the amount of active people here overall. I doubt it's an accurate representation.
Contrary to your belief, there are a large number of trolls here and they are very active.
Just goes to show you how badly Blizzard screwed up with their artificial hype scam with D3, and what happenes when you announce beta is coming a dozen times, but then release a Demo in its place.
Just goes to show how many people here believe idiotic stuff like this. What hype scam, and what's the difference between artificial hype and real hype? Yeah, baseless accusations without any backing. Secondly, common sense tells us it's a beta, not a demo. If they were looking to use the beta as a vehicle to hype the game, it would be an open beta like BF3. Now THAT was a demo. In actuality, they've done the exact opposite by limiting the size of their beta, which is further proof that it really is a infrastructure beta. Apparently the kids things it's cool to hate Blizzard and their games these days.
If they really wanted to stress test, they would place a player cap on the "server", which they would slowly raise when stable, not a cap on invites lol.
Why would they invite a whole bunch of people and say "LOL Sorry, server capped"? Talk about foolish. Blizzard understands what the servers can handle. They don't need to cap the servers (and I'd argue that the servers probably do have a cap, it's just higher than the number of people playing public games)
Honestly if anyone is the fool, it's you and your backwards logic. Blizzard didn't jerk anyone around. The only people that would think this, are the ones that created the hype themselves. Blizzard never affirmed a 2011 release. They were really hoping for one, but that's it. If you want to interpret that as a confirmation or some self entitled driven expectation, and hype yourself up over it, that's your call.
You also don't get to make up phrases like "regular and artificial hype" and base an entire argument from it when they are ridiculous definitions you came up with in your head. The same goes for "closed beta as needing an NDA" there's no rules of how a Beta test is run. There is just, again, you're ridiculous expectations.
With all do respect, you are an incredibly ignorant individual that believes everything should run, and only be run the way you think it should, not because there's a set protocol.
You are a moron, perhaps you forget, but there are many timelines in the world. The idea is to have the server full 24 hours aday, and if the server is stable, you keep raising the cap, until you find a issue, then fix the problem, wait to see if the problem is fixes, then you raise the cap again.
I'm a true beta tester, I'm not a twit like you, who thinks the main reason for a beta, is to get a early look at the game.
Ignorant because I think beta testing= bug fixes, not marketing BS. Also I'm sorry, but allowing a "total" of like 5k people in a game within a 2+ month period, that needs to be stress tested to have atleast 10-30k people on at the same time(lol not over a period of 2, 4 or 5 months) is not stress testing. This so called beta was nothing but a plublicity stunt.
PS. I couldn't care less about push backs(It's well known Blizzard has no concept of time Vs development), but making a mochory of Beta in hopes of building hype, announcing systems they can't possibly think is a good system(aka the unnatuned rune scandle, It's funny how fast they came up with a brand new system, instaed of going back to the original idea), and BSing in general is not acceptable
41% "Yes" in an diablo fansite ? In diablofans (the site with the lowest amaount of trolls and biggest amount of fanboys) ?
Creepy!
There are 340 active members in just the last hour yet only 236ish have voted. It's a very small number of votes for the amount of active people here overall. I doubt it's an accurate representation.
Contrary to your belief, there are a large number of trolls here and they are very active.
Just goes to show you how badly Blizzard screwed up with their artificial hype scam with D3, and what happenes when you announce beta is coming a dozen times, but then release a Demo in its place.
Just goes to show how many people here believe idiotic stuff like this. What hype scam, and what's the difference between artificial hype and real hype? Yeah, baseless accusations without any backing. Secondly, common sense tells us it's a beta, not a demo. If they were looking to use the beta as a vehicle to hype the game, it would be an open beta like BF3. Now THAT was a demo. In actuality, they've done the exact opposite by limiting the size of their beta, which is further proof that it really is a infrastructure beta. Apparently the kids things it's cool to hate Blizzard and their games these days.
Reg hype comes from the fanbase just anticipating a game, where Artificial hype comes from the developers jerking the fan base around, rather it be over advertising/and announcing time periods they were never planning to keep in the first place, speaking a lot of words, yet not saying anything, atleast nothing that hasn't been announced already, among other typical Blizzard BS, like holding your own gaming events, when every other company out there shares an event(lol clearly they went too far this time, because it has completely back fired on them, there's like no more hype left).
No you fool, Excluding people from a Demo, generates hype for the game(makes people want in even more).
This thing is nothing but a scam, it "is not" a Beta. In a beta, you bug test, in a beta there is literally patches more or less everyday(then there is usually additional patches when needed called hot fixes inbetween dailly patching), if this where considered a closed beta like you claim, there would be an "NDA" lol, which clearly Blizzard themselves don't consider it a beta(all their other betas have NDA's and such), Blizzard is fully aware that this is not a beta.
In a beta, especially a so called closed beta, you don't pull this F&F BS, this Press BS, and now this mass contest BS(lol contests are yet another example of creating artificial hype).
In addition, Blizzard's claim that this so called beta is for stress testing, is BS, because even if you add all the people together(including the contest winners), It's not many people at all(and I assure you, not everyone who has got a key, are even still messing around with the demo so It's even fewer people. Too few people are allowed in, and the waves are too far a part).
If they really wanted to stress test, they would place a player cap on the "server", which they would slowly raise when stable, not a cap on invites lol.
41% "Yes" in an diablo fansite ? In diablofans (the site with the lowest amaount of trolls and biggest amount of fanboys) ?
Creepy!
Just goes to show you how badly Blizzard screwed up with their artificial hype scam with D3, and what happenes when you announce beta is coming a dozen times, but then release a Demo in its place.
It definitely still looks like Act 1, has the same vibe to it. It's probably not long after the events in the beta.
Yea, it seems like act 1 alright, insanely simular map design(which Blizzard clearly stated only Act 1 maps were like that, the maps are more open in the later acts).
Well there's a differance between the era D1 came out in, the era D2 came out, and now D3. People's knowledge of game design, as well as game design bounderies is much more extensive then back then(hell when D1 first came out, the revitalised gaming idustry was still pretty new, and D2 came out at the exact time, online gaming started picking up steam.
D3 is long since removed from a era, where only the biggest dorks ever, would be involved in things like coding, game design, exc(due to the internet, information is insanely easy to find, not to mention the private development community is so helpful, It's not funny), hell the fan made game comunity, Homebrew comunity, fan translation comunity, and even modding comunity is proof of how wide spread knoledge revolving around the industry has expanded.
Oh Guild Wars huh(lol everyone atleast has heard of Guild Wars, but talk about a terrible name for a company, I doubt many people know who they are, I thought you were gonna name some obscure game, imagine if Blizzard was called Battlenet instead).
I heard Guild Wars 1 was a good game, although I wrote it off, but for personal opinion based reasons, not because I looked into the game, and found it to be a bad game(The name of the game put me off, although for all I know, is the title might've been misleading, but still. I don't subscribe to the belief that PvP is the only reason to play a MMO or even a primary reason, besides I play RO that has a godly Guild War system anyway, as well as not being completely focused on such).
With that said, damn you for posting a video(with comentary from developers at that lol), I really don't need yet another MMO to add to my list of MMOs I cycle through. Either the title is missleading(they picket it for a name, just because it sounds cool) or it refers to more of a faction/storyline based guild(not actual guilds).
Can't really tell from the Video if It's good or not(basically no battle system info or any main systems for that matter), but Guild Wars 2 does seem promising(enough to look into it more, which I must repeat, damn you!!! lol), but if that music is from the game, that'ts outstanding music.
The fact there is a core story, and actions that can change the story, instead of just a metric ton of small, static side stories is something special in of its self, atleast in the MMO scene anyway(plus a interactive map can only be seen as a + /nice addition, as long as the map design its self is good).
If the company Isn't arrogant, and doesn't play games with the fan base, that's always a good sign(not to mention "gameplay" videos with actual "relevent" comentary), that at very least the developers think their game is, and intends to release a quality title.
I'll be less sad about no mods if Blizzard updates d3 on a somewhat regular basis. I'm not expecting huge content patches, but adding some items, some maps, and some extra mobs every few months seems reasonable.
Yea I don't understand why most companies don't do that(only a few of the major MMO companies do that(unless at the time, they are working on an insanely big exansion), if they aren't planning on a huge expansion, they release mini expansions(almost all the companies that do, do such, release 4-5 a year depending on size, and the companies that release smaller, yet very meaningful expansions, can have around twice as many, not to mention also tend to hold dozens of events a year on top of that).
There's no reason such couldn't be done with D3, infact it would be "easier" to do such in a game like D3, then the MMO companies that do it.
Zoltor: "This game is going to suck. Blizzard is purposefully trying to ruin it. They have turned into a terrible company. They are scared of competition. They worry about things that don't even matter. Everything is watered down and for idiots. All of the systems in the game have been oversimplified and are stupid."
Why don't you spend your time playing a game that doesn't suck then?
Why don't you play games from a company who doesn't purposefully ruin their games?
Why don't you play games from good companies in general?
Why don't you play games from companies that aren't scared of competition?
Why don't you play games that were developed by people who care about things that really matter?
Why don't you play games that aren't completely watered down for idiots like the people waiting for Diablo 3?
Why don't you play games with good systems in them?
In short... there are a lot of things you could be doing as a gamer other than sitting on this message board and constantly talking about a game you think is going to 'suck'. Since you know Diablo 3 is going to suck so badly, I assume there are a TON of them out there.
I think your presence alone shows that you will buy the game, that you are excited about it and that you are passionate about it. I think your posts show that you are hellbent on being obnoxious and annoying people.
If you hate the game as much as you say... then you spending as much time as you do on here is kind of sad.
This is a post I made to someine whom made a simular reply in the losing interest thread:
"Actually for a bunch of people, I'm sure that's still up in the air(as in they are still deciding, don't over think my statement, I'm very literal when making such posts), so the old fans of the series just check up on sites like this, to know what they would be possibly buying, instead of buying a game in the dark, just to find out it sucks.
There are too many crappy games being made these days(in the industry in general), to go on blind faith, especially for a company that hasn't made enough games to have a rep to beginwith(also they are far apart which makes it even more worrysome, not to mention each game is a different genre).
Game design is more of a science then a art, you don't need to play a game, to know that certian system will effect gameplay in a negative way, all you need to know is how certian systems work/were implimented. Also you only need to see or hear certain things, to know if stuff sucks or are good, such as map design/music(aka the outside maps in act 1 suck, while the dungeon maps are very good "for example". Granted they say the outside maps are better in the other acts, but that doesn't change the fact that "atleast" the outside maps in act 1 are crappy)."
That should answer your underlining question, as for the others, I do play good games, from good comanies(almost exclusively, but I still like to look into a game, before going out, and buying it. There's only 1 company that Iis costistant enough, to where if given no choice, I could go on blind faith, and Blizzard Isn't it, they don't even come close to warranting such a high lv of respect, 3 titles released in a span of 10 years, is so not enough to even build a rep, atleast not a good rep anyway), that not only constantly make highend quality games, but don't pull any of the Blizzard PR or over the top greedy marketing BS tactics either.
D1 was good, D2 was borderline godly(if there was no duping issue, which most games out there don't have, and if the stat system was better balanced, D2 would've easily been one of the best games ever made period, and hands down the best in the genre even upto to this dat), so there was no reason to think D3 wouldn't atleast be as good as D2. However knowing how the industry works(development team members leaving, and corporate BS, exc), combined with how much time has passed since D2, Blizzard's past creations hold very little evidence that what they make today, will have the same or higher lv of quality(D2 came out like 12 years or so ago for crying out loud).
To Azjenco: You may want to hit the enter button, where It's pretty clear there should be a line break, so it doesn't look like a wall of text.
Come on, even the drones that play WoW(which although was unique at the time of release, I don't think was ever actually a quality title), claim it has gone down hill, and while SC2 may not be technically a bad game in its self(don't know much about SC2 personally, only SC), noone I have heard from seems to think It's even as good as the original SC, which inturn means they are going down hill(doesn't mean they are crash, and burning like Square, but neverless they are still going down hill).
Lol and It's painfully obvious that D3 wont even come close to the greatness of D2(not saying D2 was perfect, it had its issue, but aside from the lack of security which lead to duping, the issues weren't big enough to hurt gamelay to a large degree, opposed to the dumbed down systems, other systems being half-fast jobs, and there being no single player in D3. There are ways to make a game secure, without pulling DRM/not having single player at all, also you can refine a system to make it better, instead of dumbing down the system, to the most basic element).
Yea, he's such a ass, It's bad enough Blizzard PR reps in general try to "handle" their fan base, but he goes way beyond that.
To modify do you not need specific, intricate, and/or intimate knowledge of the code? Or at least pieces of it? To think that would be dupers wouldn't begin to use this to their advantage is naive.
Of course the singular person who writes the mod would have intricate knowledge of the code.
But that doesn't mean that Joe Smith who wants to hack D3 would have intricate knowledge any more then you have intricate knowledge of the code of how Windows works because you have it installed on your computer.
Does that make sense?
Again the naivety astounds me. That singular person who has no intention of duping items isn't what I'm talking about, I'm talking about Joe Smith, with the same access to the information, who is manipulating the same code for the purpose of duping items. In this case you're saying that only the people who coded windows know how to mess with that code. That simply isn't true.
I guess I just don't understand. I have Starcraft installed on my computer, so I should be able to hack Starcraft and make a Battle Cruiser that can kill anything and everything with a single shot.
Because, you know, I have access to the code.
Anyway, I guess the guys who made Eastern Sun mod for Diablo 2 just let anybody change the code to the mod if they want.
(And again, the mod has absolutely nothing to do with hacking. I don't understand how people think that having a mod means hacking. According to this logic, Stormcat, who plays Eastern Sun mod for D2, is a hacker.)
I give up, I won't be able to make anybody here understand the difference between hacking and modding. :/
You are 100% correct. A mod is NOT hacking. Anyone who thinks so clearly doesn't understand what hacking really is. People will think what they think regardless of how much truth you show them.
Adding a third party file, to chang the way things work is still a form of hacking, you're ascentionally overwhiting the code, without literally touching the code.
It's really not that different then botting, accept instead of a small file designed to soft edit pre-existing code, It's a full blown program desined to bypass/hack the login screen, and gameplay controls.
Both things are forms of hacking. If you are changing stuff that was never meant to be changes(aka there's no in game editor is there) or doing stuff to bypass how the game was desinged to be played, It's hacking.
I said it perfectly on page 7:
"I give up, I won't be able to make anybody here understand the difference between hacking and modding."
"That's because there is no differance, modding is hacking(how can you debate this, the very nature of a mod is to change things about a game to something else that was never meant to be changed, so the very definition of modding is hacking. Also if game developers meant for people to change stuff, they would've added a game editor system).
The only thing is, certain types of modding is accepted by the community(like map modding depending on the genre, and skins), but either way nomatter how you look at it, you are still hacking. "
You're losing interest in the beta, not Diablo 3, you haven't played it.
Frankly who cares about if you're losing interest? You're still going to buy the finished product and play it till your fingers bleed because there'll be nothing else even comparable to Diablo on the market.
Inb4:(lol@>)Skyrim.
Actually for a bunch of people, I'm sure that's still up in the air(as in they are still deciding, don't over think my statement, I'm very literal when making such posts), so the old fans of the series just check up on sites like this, to know what they would be possibly buying, instead of buying a game in the dark, just to find out it sucks.
There are too many crappy games being made these days(in the industry in general), to go on blind faith, especially for a company that hasn't made enough games to have a rep to beginwith(also they are far apart which makes it even more worrysome, not to mention each game is a different genre).
Game design is more of a science then a art, you don't need to play a game, to know that certian system will effect gameplay in a negative way, all you need to know is how certian systems work/were implimented. Also you only need to see or hear certain things, to know if stuff sucks or are good, such as map design/music(aka the outside maps in act 1 suck, while the dungeon maps are very good "for example". Granted they say the outside maps are better in the other acts, but that doesn't change the fact that "atleast" the outside maps in act 1 are crappy).
0
0
Yea, It's so obvious Diablo is a female in D3(I'm surprised people didn't notice before that highlighted pic).
Well so what to do now, instead of killing Diablo, do we now throw her over our knee, and spank her for being a bad girl or what?
0
Lol if he does that, he'll be unstoppable, bit I think that would be awesome neverless, talk about a challenge.
0
This looks like It's probally the Book of Cain, so I opted not to read it(since I plan on buying the book), but neverless cool find.
0
Lol so true, they have serious time management issues, combined with the fact, personally I think they don't even want to make non WoW titled games anymore, which is why it has that lazy feel to it(clear evidence is that somehow a very small multiplayer game, took way more then any MMO would ever take, nevermind other non MMO games, yet alot of the systems are over simplified, which should have made it a very easy game to make), but due to the fact the Diablo series is what built Blizzard in the first place, followed by SC, they feel they have no choice.
0
You are a moron, perhaps you forget, but there are many timelines in the world. The idea is to have the server full 24 hours aday, and if the server is stable, you keep raising the cap, until you find a issue, then fix the problem, wait to see if the problem is fixes, then you raise the cap again.
I'm a true beta tester, I'm not a twit like you, who thinks the main reason for a beta, is to get a early look at the game.
Ignorant because I think beta testing= bug fixes, not marketing BS. Also I'm sorry, but allowing a "total" of like 5k people in a game within a 2+ month period, that needs to be stress tested to have atleast 10-30k people on at the same time(lol not over a period of 2, 4 or 5 months) is not stress testing. This so called beta was nothing but a plublicity stunt.
PS. I couldn't care less about push backs(It's well known Blizzard has no concept of time Vs development), but making a mochory of Beta in hopes of building hype, announcing systems they can't possibly think is a good system(aka the unnatuned rune scandle, It's funny how fast they came up with a brand new system, instaed of going back to the original idea), and BSing in general is not acceptable
0
Reg hype comes from the fanbase just anticipating a game, where Artificial hype comes from the developers jerking the fan base around, rather it be over advertising/and announcing time periods they were never planning to keep in the first place, speaking a lot of words, yet not saying anything, atleast nothing that hasn't been announced already, among other typical Blizzard BS, like holding your own gaming events, when every other company out there shares an event(lol clearly they went too far this time, because it has completely back fired on them, there's like no more hype left).
No you fool, Excluding people from a Demo, generates hype for the game(makes people want in even more).
This thing is nothing but a scam, it "is not" a Beta. In a beta, you bug test, in a beta there is literally patches more or less everyday(then there is usually additional patches when needed called hot fixes inbetween dailly patching), if this where considered a closed beta like you claim, there would be an "NDA" lol, which clearly Blizzard themselves don't consider it a beta(all their other betas have NDA's and such), Blizzard is fully aware that this is not a beta.
In a beta, especially a so called closed beta, you don't pull this F&F BS, this Press BS, and now this mass contest BS(lol contests are yet another example of creating artificial hype).
In addition, Blizzard's claim that this so called beta is for stress testing, is BS, because even if you add all the people together(including the contest winners), It's not many people at all(and I assure you, not everyone who has got a key, are even still messing around with the demo so It's even fewer people. Too few people are allowed in, and the waves are too far a part).
If they really wanted to stress test, they would place a player cap on the "server", which they would slowly raise when stable, not a cap on invites lol.
0
Just goes to show you how badly Blizzard screwed up with their artificial hype scam with D3, and what happenes when you announce beta is coming a dozen times, but then release a Demo in its place.
0
Yea, it seems like act 1 alright, insanely simular map design(which Blizzard clearly stated only Act 1 maps were like that, the maps are more open in the later acts).
0
D3 is long since removed from a era, where only the biggest dorks ever, would be involved in things like coding, game design, exc(due to the internet, information is insanely easy to find, not to mention the private development community is so helpful, It's not funny), hell the fan made game comunity, Homebrew comunity, fan translation comunity, and even modding comunity is proof of how wide spread knoledge revolving around the industry has expanded.
Oh Guild Wars huh(lol everyone atleast has heard of Guild Wars, but talk about a terrible name for a company, I doubt many people know who they are, I thought you were gonna name some obscure game, imagine if Blizzard was called Battlenet instead).
I heard Guild Wars 1 was a good game, although I wrote it off, but for personal opinion based reasons, not because I looked into the game, and found it to be a bad game(The name of the game put me off, although for all I know, is the title might've been misleading, but still. I don't subscribe to the belief that PvP is the only reason to play a MMO or even a primary reason, besides I play RO that has a godly Guild War system anyway, as well as not being completely focused on such).
With that said, damn you for posting a video(with comentary from developers at that lol), I really don't need yet another MMO to add to my list of MMOs I cycle through. Either the title is missleading(they picket it for a name, just because it sounds cool) or it refers to more of a faction/storyline based guild(not actual guilds).
Can't really tell from the Video if It's good or not(basically no battle system info or any main systems for that matter), but Guild Wars 2 does seem promising(enough to look into it more, which I must repeat, damn you!!! lol), but if that music is from the game, that'ts outstanding music.
The fact there is a core story, and actions that can change the story, instead of just a metric ton of small, static side stories is something special in of its self, atleast in the MMO scene anyway(plus a interactive map can only be seen as a + /nice addition, as long as the map design its self is good).
If the company Isn't arrogant, and doesn't play games with the fan base, that's always a good sign(not to mention "gameplay" videos with actual "relevent" comentary), that at very least the developers think their game is, and intends to release a quality title.
0
Yea I don't understand why most companies don't do that(only a few of the major MMO companies do that(unless at the time, they are working on an insanely big exansion), if they aren't planning on a huge expansion, they release mini expansions(almost all the companies that do, do such, release 4-5 a year depending on size, and the companies that release smaller, yet very meaningful expansions, can have around twice as many, not to mention also tend to hold dozens of events a year on top of that).
There's no reason such couldn't be done with D3, infact it would be "easier" to do such in a game like D3, then the MMO companies that do it.
0
This is a post I made to someine whom made a simular reply in the losing interest thread:
"Actually for a bunch of people, I'm sure that's still up in the air(as in they are still deciding, don't over think my statement, I'm very literal when making such posts), so the old fans of the series just check up on sites like this, to know what they would be possibly buying, instead of buying a game in the dark, just to find out it sucks.
There are too many crappy games being made these days(in the industry in general), to go on blind faith, especially for a company that hasn't made enough games to have a rep to beginwith(also they are far apart which makes it even more worrysome, not to mention each game is a different genre).
Game design is more of a science then a art, you don't need to play a game, to know that certian system will effect gameplay in a negative way, all you need to know is how certian systems work/were implimented. Also you only need to see or hear certain things, to know if stuff sucks or are good, such as map design/music(aka the outside maps in act 1 suck, while the dungeon maps are very good "for example". Granted they say the outside maps are better in the other acts, but that doesn't change the fact that "atleast" the outside maps in act 1 are crappy)."
That should answer your underlining question, as for the others, I do play good games, from good comanies(almost exclusively, but I still like to look into a game, before going out, and buying it. There's only 1 company that Iis costistant enough, to where if given no choice, I could go on blind faith, and Blizzard Isn't it, they don't even come close to warranting such a high lv of respect, 3 titles released in a span of 10 years, is so not enough to even build a rep, atleast not a good rep anyway), that not only constantly make highend quality games, but don't pull any of the Blizzard PR or over the top greedy marketing BS tactics either.
D1 was good, D2 was borderline godly(if there was no duping issue, which most games out there don't have, and if the stat system was better balanced, D2 would've easily been one of the best games ever made period, and hands down the best in the genre even upto to this dat), so there was no reason to think D3 wouldn't atleast be as good as D2. However knowing how the industry works(development team members leaving, and corporate BS, exc), combined with how much time has passed since D2, Blizzard's past creations hold very little evidence that what they make today, will have the same or higher lv of quality(D2 came out like 12 years or so ago for crying out loud).
0
Come on, even the drones that play WoW(which although was unique at the time of release, I don't think was ever actually a quality title), claim it has gone down hill, and while SC2 may not be technically a bad game in its self(don't know much about SC2 personally, only SC), noone I have heard from seems to think It's even as good as the original SC, which inturn means they are going down hill(doesn't mean they are crash, and burning like Square, but neverless they are still going down hill).
Lol and It's painfully obvious that D3 wont even come close to the greatness of D2(not saying D2 was perfect, it had its issue, but aside from the lack of security which lead to duping, the issues weren't big enough to hurt gamelay to a large degree, opposed to the dumbed down systems, other systems being half-fast jobs, and there being no single player in D3. There are ways to make a game secure, without pulling DRM/not having single player at all, also you can refine a system to make it better, instead of dumbing down the system, to the most basic element).
Yea, he's such a ass, It's bad enough Blizzard PR reps in general try to "handle" their fan base, but he goes way beyond that.
I never heard of them, what games do they make?
0
Adding a third party file, to chang the way things work is still a form of hacking, you're ascentionally overwhiting the code, without literally touching the code.
It's really not that different then botting, accept instead of a small file designed to soft edit pre-existing code, It's a full blown program desined to bypass/hack the login screen, and gameplay controls.
Both things are forms of hacking. If you are changing stuff that was never meant to be changes(aka there's no in game editor is there) or doing stuff to bypass how the game was desinged to be played, It's hacking.
I said it perfectly on page 7:
"I give up, I won't be able to make anybody here understand the difference between hacking and modding."
"That's because there is no differance, modding is hacking(how can you debate this, the very nature of a mod is to change things about a game to something else that was never meant to be changed, so the very definition of modding is hacking. Also if game developers meant for people to change stuff, they would've added a game editor system).
The only thing is, certain types of modding is accepted by the community(like map modding depending on the genre, and skins), but either way nomatter how you look at it, you are still hacking. "
0
Actually for a bunch of people, I'm sure that's still up in the air(as in they are still deciding, don't over think my statement, I'm very literal when making such posts), so the old fans of the series just check up on sites like this, to know what they would be possibly buying, instead of buying a game in the dark, just to find out it sucks.
There are too many crappy games being made these days(in the industry in general), to go on blind faith, especially for a company that hasn't made enough games to have a rep to beginwith(also they are far apart which makes it even more worrysome, not to mention each game is a different genre).
Game design is more of a science then a art, you don't need to play a game, to know that certian system will effect gameplay in a negative way, all you need to know is how certian systems work/were implimented. Also you only need to see or hear certain things, to know if stuff sucks or are good, such as map design/music(aka the outside maps in act 1 suck, while the dungeon maps are very good "for example". Granted they say the outside maps are better in the other acts, but that doesn't change the fact that "atleast" the outside maps in act 1 are crappy).