-
- TheTinCanHitMan
- Registered User
-
Member for 12 years, 11 months, and 9 days
Last active Sat, Dec, 10 2011 12:00:54
- 0 Followers
- 88 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
-
Jun 8, 2011TheTinCanHitMan posted a message on Purgatory Video (6/6/11)Plus the controls for d3 were made for keyboard and mouse, it will be weirder on ps3 to control your character. The pc players will be all elitist against the ps 3 players lol. I don't really care, they did D1 on the ps and I'll never buy it for the ps3 anyways.Posted in: News
-
May 23, 2011TheTinCanHitMan posted a message on Diablo Lore Series Part 1Posted in: News
@NoxioussQuote from PhrozenDragon
Because when two great forces clash, it's generally a good idea not stand in the middle of them. Especially when said forces will actively try to destroy you if you're not on their side. Choosing a side means only having to worry about one side rather than both.
In the teachings of Trag'Oul there's meant to be a perfect balance between the angel and demon influences. He/she/it says that one side left alone would destroy itself if memory serves me right.
Generally since demons are the ones trying to influence humans the most, it's usually right to be on the angel's side. The most the humans ever get help of the angels is from Tyrael, and that's about it, but you'll notice from the Diablo games that there's a bit too much demon going around..... -
May 22, 2011TheTinCanHitMan posted a message on Diablo Lore Series Part 1Just as it took a long time to suppress humanity's powers, it will probably take a long time to bring them back. My brother and I are such fanboys that we have all the books in our bookshelf. I'll agree that knack isn't the best with his vocabulary, but he's a great story writer. Some of the others had not as interesting plots, but pretty good writing(thinking of mel odom and robert marks.) I'd bet most of the books would only be interesting to diablo fans though.Posted in: News
One thing I think would interest the people is if you went into Trag'oul and the necromancers. I remember not being too fond of playing a necro back when we first bought D2, but it made it more fun to play them after I read the books. Without Uldysseus's bro, the original necro nephalim, and trag'oul sanctuary would have already been lost in the war when all the angels discovered the humans.
edit: forgot to mention there's plenty of cool necros in the other books that made me like them more. -
May 19, 2011TheTinCanHitMan posted a message on The Follower BluesPosted in: News
You seem to be putting him down for not having "facts" as you put it, yet this statement is so groundless this almost sounds satirical if you weren't so critical. First of all there is truth in it. Blizzard CAN balance it to make it work in pvp, but what does this have to do with his argument? He's stating/justifying the reasons blizzard chose not to add PvP, so I don't see what the big deal is.Quote from Legatus1982
It IS as simple as a checkbox. And there ISN'T a reason why bliz can't nerf/buff/modify until it is balanced and works if they wanted to take the time.Quote from Jackzor
Well, for starters, I'm not telling Blizz to do anything. Their own playtesting and iterations led them to the current conclusion to the follower 'problem,' and I'm simply pointing out the reasoning behind it.Quote from Legatus1982Mercs were never essential even in d2 and they most certainly CAN be balanced. Who are you to tell blizzard what they can and can't do? Have you ever programmed a diablo game?
A good place for you to start in this debate would be saying something that is true.
And I dont really care if mercs or followers can be used in pvp, but again I'd prefer having the option. If they aren't balanced in pvp, don't use them in pvp.
And I'm honestly sick and tired of everyone saying 'I just want the option.' Of course you do. That doesn't mean that Blizzard should sacrifice quality just so that you have more options. We all know that its not a realistic solution to just have it be a checkmark. If it doesn't work or isn't balanced, it shouldn't be in the game. Period. There are plenty of other options in D3, we don't need more that don't meet Blizz's quality standards.
Until you accept this simple fact and talk some truth your entire argument is pointless.
Here's how most adults handle conflicting opinions:
Person A: My way is the best.
Person B: I disagree, I like my way better.
Both: OK, we'll come up with a compromise.
Here's you:
Jackzor: My way is the best.
Person B: I disagree, I like my way better.
Jackzor: NO! I want it MY way. You're just a big stupid-head.
What is wrong in this scenario?
I am still trying to figure out why this was typed..... When something is clearly "wrong" in it's context you don't need to compromise. In fact your're on a forum where what you do is DEBATE, and when people debate they aren't always compromising. -
May 18, 2011TheTinCanHitMan posted a message on The Follower BluesPosted in: NewsQuote from Legatus1982
Mercs were never essential even in d2 and they most certainly CAN be balanced. Who are you to tell blizzard what they can and can't do? Have you ever programmed a diablo game?Quote from Jackzor
If (with an emphasis on if) there was a way to actually make it optional across the board, then sure, it should be implemented. But theres just not. So its not in the endgame.
And as for the number of people disappointed, there was an equally large crowd complaining that followers would be essential.
Did you even read my posts? I pointed out multiple different ways that followers would be almost impossible to balance in a way that makes them both useful and non-essential. If you can't see a valid reason in there its your own fault.Because you still haven't provided a valid reason that I can see; all I see is you telling everyone else you don't care what they get because you want it your way. And that is pissing me off to be honest.
Consider other people please.
A good place for you to start in this debate would be saying something that is true.
And I dont really care if mercs or followers can be used in pvp, but again I'd prefer having the option. If they aren't balanced in pvp, don't use them in pvp.
So basically you like to have an option even if it doesn't matter to you, or if they are balanced for pvp? Why would blizzard even try to add an optional npc to help you fight in a PLAYER vs PLAYER match, that is unbalanced and outside the actual character's skills? The NPCs that are unbalanced would only make the pvpers who want them to fight in the ring with them call them horribly implemented due to many reasons I don't think I need to say. If blizzard worked hard to counter this right now and balance them, they'd be putting time into a system they wanted to limit, and only have as a hand holder for the "newbies." Mercs WERE a horrible system in D2, they made your "extremely powerful" character look like a pushover when a random computer with barely any looks to him could solo a whole act. Now people may enjoy this, but when an NPC can do things in a game you can't, especially when the focus of the game is to make you feel almighty taking out the greatest demons by yourself, it makes it seem like any average joe in sanctuary can beat up the biggest baddies around, if you give them armor and train them. That's how I kind of felt about the d2 merc system.
They "could" do all these things you said, but they've already decided they mostly want your character to fight alone, or with other players, and that's why the follower system will only go as far as it is now. If they do decide to take it further later on in expansions then I would not mind, as long as they do it smartly. Even if I did buy mercs all the time, I never really liked them or looking after them. -
May 15, 2011TheTinCanHitMan posted a message on The Follower BluesI think the problem I'm having with this new system is that I'm thinking in terms of D2 mercs. Blizz just wants this system to add a spice to the beginning of the game and get people use to co-op. Since I've been stewing over D3 over years and have had tons of time to create my own ideal(or pretense, from past experiences with this kind of system) which has made this kind of shocking. I'll wait til beta until I judge it since I'm so torn.Posted in: News
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
0
0
I actually am kind of less ragy now, the more bash and kav are commenting on it the more assured I am that this game is going to be really good. Perhaps these new features will make it and be better than the past ones? we'll see
0
Actually when Kaivax posted saying it's definitely Diablo, I felt better. I need some blizz quotes saying how fun the current build of d3 is!
Thanks for all the coverage!
Bashiok: "We want the game to essentially look like you're playing a painting. Everything is 3D, but the textures and ways that scenes are built are intended to give the look of a painted scene. Some games go for realism with a lot of shaders and high poly counts, that's just not our intent with the visual style. We want it to be a timeless aesthetic because we expect people are going to be playing for a long time. Looking back at cutting edge games even a few years ago and they don't tend to hold up very well, but for Diablo we want it to be as visually pleasing 10 years from now as it is the first time you play it.
Even videos really don't do the beauty of the game justice. I think anyone that's sat down to play can attest to that." That's what I'm talking about!
0
Although I don't agree with the attitude of those defending it. "It would happen anyway so why not let blizzard control the selling and make a profit." THAT to me is negative.
Meh, I'm not a fan so i'll probably do as I always did, stick to playing with friends or myself.
Now getting rid of skill points... could or could not work. The idea of having items and level effect it mostly is interesting, but I don't think I'll have an opinion on it until I play.
0
Congratz blizzard, you made real money an integral part to a video game. I liked it better when games were meant to be fun and away from the real world. Now the video game industry just keeps finding new ways to make things more "casual" and easier for people.
0
I'm hoping it becomes frowned upon and not too common for d3 online with this RMAH, or I'll be pissed if everyone starts doing it.
0
I get your attitude, but what you just said is akin to, " get over it son, your brother got a new bike for being a good boy, you just had to get one by actually working for 6 months."
0
edit: added a few words
0
This will most likely make me play hardcore and still continue down my mostly singleplayer path.
The other new things weren't even exciting enough that this new info has underwhelmed me more than any past information announcement. I stayed up until midnight for this <_<
0
0
0
You should see this topic on the D3 forums. This guy was saying guild wars 2 was gonna be better than D3 because the pre-rendered cutscenes looked better than D3..... lol
I liked it better when I was 10-ish and never picked up on these type of things that may or may not have existed.
0
In the teachings of Trag'Oul there's meant to be a perfect balance between the angel and demon influences. He/she/it says that one side left alone would destroy itself if memory serves me right.
Generally since demons are the ones trying to influence humans the most, it's usually right to be on the angel's side. The most the humans ever get help of the angels is from Tyrael, and that's about it, but you'll notice from the Diablo games that there's a bit too much demon going around.....
0
One thing I think would interest the people is if you went into Trag'oul and the necromancers. I remember not being too fond of playing a necro back when we first bought D2, but it made it more fun to play them after I read the books. Without Uldysseus's bro, the original necro nephalim, and trag'oul sanctuary would have already been lost in the war when all the angels discovered the humans.
edit: forgot to mention there's plenty of cool necros in the other books that made me like them more.