Well thats the only good thing about online only. But there are a ton of problems that come with it, i doubt that onlyonline is a good decision they made.
Why is peoples upset about the non existing single player feature?
Does anybody with a Diablo 3 account not have internet access at all time?
Maybe because lan and singleplayer that means accessibility was the major factor of Diablo 2 success?
You can still play together in Diablo 3? I don't believe you get into a home with a Diablo 3 fan, that don't got internet neither. Almost every home with a computer got internet access too
Unfortunately that is not true. Especially for country where month salary is 200$.
The game is not free from hacks, and never will be, but its much harder to make hacks and not to be baned. Also real hacks wont happen until the game is released, and you will not see them on youtube or be available for download on internet, until blizard finds about it, and starts baning.
That's it, in a nutshell. And let's be honest. If you don't have the right merc equipment, some of those builds simply do not work (such as trapasin), unless you plan on running to Akara every time you see an immune. Some of the other builds are terrible, some builds are pvp only.
Yea, lots of customization there...
/sarcasm
And how many viable builds do you have in diablo 3? You don't, and will not know until you get to inferno or hell. The problem of diablo 2 was unbalanced skills, if D3 has unbalanced skills, same will happen.
I personally think the models look too cartoony compared to Diablo and DII, but the thing you have to remember is that those games were made over 10 years ago. The graphics were limited (and the characters were sprites[pictures that would change to give the feeling of motion]) then and the dark tones meant that it was easy to cut the graphics requirements down for computers that didn't have top of the line graphics cards. I've actually grown to accept the new toons though.
All units in diablo 2 (maybe also in diablo 1, i cant remeber) where 3d models converted to pixels. It was darker because of art style they chosen for diablo then, it didn't have to do anything with performance.
Beta is easy, because its beginning of game, and is harder or same compared to d2 first 1/3 of act 1. It doesnt show anything if the game will be easy later. Also 4 difficulties doesn't mean the game will be hard, it will all depend how blizzard balance it.
Nah I'm pretty sure all D1 and D2 monsters and characters were sprites. And that's what gave it a gritty feeling, all the uneveness throughout the game. But honestly the "dark" you speak of isn't dark. You're all looking for an absence of color and you know it. You're all just hiding behind this dark thing. Honestly go look at the "Darken+Sharpen" filter. All it does is desaturate the colors giving you a more monotonous play experience. If that is what you mean by "dark" I think we all need to pick up a damn dictionary because AFAIK dark is when you can't see, not when everything has an absence of color.
D2 monster are 3d converted to pixel, i know it because of modding it. Not shure about D1.
The problem is not only in color, but in the art style. You can change the color, but model design and environment will stay the same. That is one of the complaint that people have with D3 art style.
I personally think the models look too cartoony compared to Diablo and DII, but the thing you have to remember is that those games were made over 10 years ago. The graphics were limited (and the characters were sprites[pictures that would change to give the feeling of motion]) then and the dark tones meant that it was easy to cut the graphics requirements down for computers that didn't have top of the line graphics cards. I've actually grown to accept the new toons though.
All units in diablo 2 (maybe also in diablo 1, i cant remeber) where 3d models converted to pixels. It was darker because of art style they chosen for diablo then, it didn't have to do anything with performance.
Beta is easy, because its beginning of game, and is harder or same compared to d2 first 1/3 of act 1. It doesnt show anything if the game will be easy later. Also 4 difficulties doesn't mean the game will be hard, it will all depend how blizzard balance it.
...While Im little disappointed with direction Diablo 3 is going...
Which direction would that be?
Well, I maybe used the wrong word, but thing that they removed and changed that made a part of diablo players (including me) not like that much, but i'll make a detailed thread about it when i'm not to lazy.
Hi all. Im 25 years old gamer that loves arpgs and especially the diablo games. Been playing them for more than 7 years (D1 and D2), and still play it sometimes. While Im little disappointed with direction Diablo 3 is going, I'm happy that diablo as a franchise is still alive and roling.
0
0
0
0
And how many viable builds do you have in diablo 3? You don't, and will not know until you get to inferno or hell. The problem of diablo 2 was unbalanced skills, if D3 has unbalanced skills, same will happen.
0
D2 monster are 3d converted to pixel, i know it because of modding it. Not shure about D1.
The problem is not only in color, but in the art style. You can change the color, but model design and environment will stay the same. That is one of the complaint that people have with D3 art style.
0
All units in diablo 2 (maybe also in diablo 1, i cant remeber) where 3d models converted to pixels. It was darker because of art style they chosen for diablo then, it didn't have to do anything with performance.
Beta is easy, because its beginning of game, and is harder or same compared to d2 first 1/3 of act 1. It doesnt show anything if the game will be easy later. Also 4 difficulties doesn't mean the game will be hard, it will all depend how blizzard balance it.
0
0