The spam thing is really outrageous, how is it even possible that its happening?
It's happening because Blizzard cant be arsed setting up filters that blocks certain words/sentences in chat.
Quite easy to do, and it would limit the spam greatly by keeping the filter database somewhat up to date.
Easy to do, and easy to screw up the easy (naive) implementation and end up making a clbuttic programming error (google "clbuttic"). Even if they did filter certain words/phrases the spammers would catch on immediately and just work around it. Not a scalable solution.
LOL build diversity in Diablo 1
LOL PVP balance in Diablo 2
You know nothing, OP.
Excuse me boy? Here we go again, yet another fool who has no clue what he is talking about. Please do entertain me and inform me of how unbalanced D2 PvP was.
JUST because I'm slow, and easily confused, are you telling me you think D2's pvp was balanced?
LOL build diversity in Diablo 1
LOL PVP balance in Diablo 2
You know nothing, OP.
Excuse me boy? Here we go again, yet another fool who has no clue what he is talking about. Please do entertain me and inform me of how unbalanced D2 PvP was.
JUST because I'm slow, and easily confused, are you telling me you think D2's pvp was balanced?
Um yea. It like a chess match, certain pieces had advantages over other pieces, but any piece could beat any piece on any given day. Given the skill of the players matched up, now there were bad match ups and good match ups, like in any great game. Just because you or anyone else in here was bad at the game, doesn't mean the game isn't balanced. That is like me saying Street Fighter is the most unbalanced piece of crap because Zangief has a grab that goes quarter screen, or that Ryu can trade SRK to U1.
The spam thing is really outrageous, how is it even possible that its happening?
It's happening because Blizzard cant be arsed setting up filters that blocks certain words/sentences in chat.
Quite easy to do, and it would limit the spam greatly by keeping the filter database somewhat up to date.
Easy to do, and easy to screw up the easy (naive) implementation and end up making a clbuttic programming error (google "clbuttic"). Even if they did filter certain words/phrases the spammers would catch on immediately and just work around it. Not a scalable solution.
It is very effective and "scalable" if updated regularly, many games does it this way.
It's the only way to do it next to muting specific names/levels/guest account.
Thanks for your amazing input though, as per usual.
I suppose you don't understand what "scalable" means since you quoted it as if it were not a word, but the fact that it would have to be updated constantly means it isn't scalable. Thanks again to you for making off-the-cuff claims about things you don't understand.
I've honestly got little problems with the game, but I feel it was worth the wait overall. The problems I have with it is the auto-join into General Chat. That should have never been implemented. And y'all talking about blocking words, I am not an advocate of censorship. Any game that decides to filter words automatically, and I'm not talking about replacing with asterisks, will not get any support from me.
Another issue of mine is the loot. I like the loot. I even like the idea a bit of how a perfectly rolled blue or rare could be better then an average Legendary. But I feel that Legendaries should already have a bigger advantage because they are actually rarer than rares. And along the same lines is the first boss kill loot. While it is being changed, I am not actually advancing past Normal on new characters and further on my other characters until they implement the guaranteed rare for first time boss kills per difficulty.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I don't always burn. But when I do, I use hellfire.
LOL build diversity in Diablo 1
LOL PVP balance in Diablo 2
You know nothing, OP.
Excuse me boy? Here we go again, yet another fool who has no clue what he is talking about. Please do entertain me and inform me of how unbalanced D2 PvP was.
JUST because I'm slow, and easily confused, are you telling me you think D2's pvp was balanced?
Um yea. It like a chess match, certain pieces had advantages over other pieces, but any piece could beat any piece on any given day. Given the skill of the players matched up, now there were bad match ups and good match ups, like in any great game. Just because you or anyone else in here was bad at the game, doesn't mean the game isn't balanced. That is like me saying Street Fighter is the most unbalanced piece of crap because Zangief has a grab that goes quarter screen, or that Ryu can trade SRK to U1.
You're 100% retarded if you think D2 PVP was balanced in any way. Enigma and other retarded runewords post 1.10 patch just made things worse.
It only scored an 88 on Metacritic for instance. And 8.5 on Gamespot.
Those are pretty good scores, you know?
I don't get it, why do people think that those scores matter? What matters is the user score, that is the most accurate measure of the game's status. The sad thing is that the user score for Diablo 3 is 4.1 on metacritic, compared to the critic score that is 88. Critic score is based on shallow criteria. Sure the game is fun in the beginning. But Diablo is a game that is meant to be replayed over and over, kind of like Diablo 2/LOD was and that is where the USERS of the game have the final say of the quality of the end-product.
Face it, Diablo 3 is a mediocre game. And I do agree with the OP +1. Just get the refund, the only way blizzard will learn anything.
Edit: The score is 4.0 now and dropping. Vocal minority huh? Don't kid yourselves. Posters here that are raging at the OP are either in complete fanboy denial or you haven't clocked in 60 hours yet. Just wait. The RMAH will be the last nail in the coffin for this game, mark my words.
It only scored an 88 on Metacritic for instance. And 8.5 on Gamespot.
Those are pretty good scores, you know?
I don't get it, why do people think that those scores matter? What matters is the user score, that is the most accurate measure of the game's status. The sad thing is that the user score for Diablo 3 is 4.1 on metacritic, compared to the critic score that is 88. Critic score is based on shallow criteria. Sure the game is fun in the beginning. But Diablo is a game that is meant to be replayed over and over, kind of like Diablo 2/LOD was and that is where the USERS of the game have the final say of the quality of the end-product.
Face it, Diablo 3 is a mediocre game. And I do agree with the OP +1. Just get the refund, the only way blizzard will learn anything.
You do know that user scores are bullshit right? Sites like 4chan and various other troll sites encourge their users to actively post bad reviews of video games. Case in point, Mass Effect 3.
Saying to judge a game based on metacritic's or actually any site's user reviews is just a sign of your naivety.
It only scored an 88 on Metacritic for instance. And 8.5 on Gamespot.
Those are pretty good scores, you know?
I don't get it, why do people think that those scores matter? What matters is the user score, that is the most accurate measure of the game's status. The sad thing is that the user score for Diablo 3 is 4.1 on metacritic, compared to the critic score that is 88. Critic score is based on shallow criteria. Sure the game is fun in the beginning. But Diablo is a game that is meant to be replayed over and over, kind of like Diablo 2/LOD was and that is where the USERS of the game have the final say of the quality of the end-product.
Face it, Diablo 3 is a mediocre game. And I do agree with the OP +1. Just get the refund, the only way blizzard will learn anything.
You do know that user scores are bullshit right? Sites like 4chan and various other troll sites encourge their users to actively post bad reviews of video games. Case in point, Mass Effect 3.
Saying to judge a game based on metacritic's or actually any site's user reviews is just a sign of your naivety.
Excuses excuses. Just read some of those reviews from casual users, many differ in their gripes but overall end up in that the game is mediocre. Have you visited the official Diablo 3 forums lately? Endless 'this is boring', 'I want a refund', 'how to get a refund', 'why Diablo is a flop' threads nonestop. It is evident, you can't make this shit up. And look at these forums, lower number of such threads but still. Case and point here. The game is fine for first run or two at most, but then it's meh. But it is SURE AS HELL not a Dibalo 2 killer, anyone who thinks that is mentally challenged or has never played Diablo 2/LOD.
Edit:
How is that naive? Users are the ones that give the most blatant and raw reviews, they say what they feel openly and when it is the majority it usually means a whole lot, generally it is unbiased. You actually trusting the reviews of the official critics is what really makes you the naive one. Like I said, they base their score on shallow criteria: Graphics(In a conventional sense), initial gameplay mechanics etc, not the end game. They don't delve deep into it. And most probably never even played Diablo 2/LOD.
LOL. Are you using official forums as an argument now? Are you serious? The very very VERY tiny portion of overall players post on forums and the ones complaining are the vocal minority. The VERY vocal minority. The ones who have rants/issues to complain about usually talk the loudest. The ones who are content...don't post. They keep playing.
Way to brush off my legit argument with "Excuses, excuses." Good to know you have nothing legit or concrete to bring to this table.
LOL. Are you using official forums as an argument now? Are you serious? The very very VERY tiny portion of overall players post on forums and the ones complaining are the vocal minority. The VERY vocal minority. The ones who have rants/issues to complain about usually talk the loudest. The ones who are content...don't post. They keep playing.
Way to brush off my legit argument with "Excuses, excuses." Good to know you have nothing legit or concrete to bring to this table.
Legit argument? How is that a legit argument to say that heeding user reviews is naive? They're the most open and brutal, they show the players' real independent views, they don't work for anyone.
How do you know? Some of them don't even know english, some don't care for the forums. Why do you naturally assume that they are playing the game when they're not on the forums? You don't speak for them.
Your all a bunch of idiots and i'm basing that on heresay and my own opinion. I have no clue what i'm talking about nor do i care to listen to the good things people will say about you. I've formed my opinion and will not budge on how i feel. I will continously come up with reasons to not like you even if my reasons are stupid and have no merit i will stand by them and if they are some how proved wrong i will just come up with new bullshit. All i know about you is what i've experienced in about 10seconds of reading your post and i've come to the conclusion that your a bunch of idiots.
yes that's what you guys sound like if it was put into a different perspective.
Most of the games you guys talk about are old and have been out a good amount of time. There was alot wrong when they came out and it was addressed in patches or expansions along the way. Also, many people's memories of the games are skewed in the fact they glorify it. Would i go back and play golden eye because i think it was a better FPS game then battlefield 3 or MW3? Many of your complaints are gonna be addressed in future patches. If you'd even bothered to log on the past few days you'd know that many of the spammers have been banned. Legendaries are gonna be addressed, the whole quest thing is also gonna be addressed. Yes, i'm sure you'll find something else to complain about. The game you pictured was not what was released and your disappointed. No matter what they do to make this game better your not going to be happy with it because it's not what you wanted. I could care less how many people quit playing this game. The only thing i care about is if your going to complain atleast come up with good reasons or constructive criticism. Otherwise you just sound like that 6 yr old kid who wants a toy and his parents told him no.
It only scored an 88 on Metacritic for instance. And 8.5 on Gamespot.
Those are pretty good scores, you know?
I don't get it, why do people think that those scores matter? What matters is the user score, that is the most accurate measure of the game's status. The sad thing is that the user score for Diablo 3 is 4.1 on metacritic, compared to the critic score that is 88. Critic score is based on shallow criteria. Sure the game is fun in the beginning. But Diablo is a game that is meant to be replayed over and over, kind of like Diablo 2/LOD was and that is where the USERS of the game have the final say of the quality of the end-product.
Face it, Diablo 3 is a mediocre game. And I do agree with the OP +1. Just get the refund, the only way blizzard will learn anything.
You do know that user scores are bullshit right? Sites like 4chan and various other troll sites encourge their users to actively post bad reviews of video games. Case in point, Mass Effect 3.
Saying to judge a game based on metacritic's or actually any site's user reviews is just a sign of your naivety.
Excuses excuses. Just read some of those reviews from casual users, many differ in their gripes but overall end up in that the game is mediocre. Have you visited the official Diablo 3 forums lately? Endless 'this is boring', 'I want a refund', 'how to get a refund', 'why Diablo is a flop' threads nonestop. It is evident, you can't make this shit up. And look at these forums, lower number of such threads but still. Case and point here. The game is fine for first run or two at most, but then it's meh. But it is SURE AS HELL not a Dibalo 2 killer, anyone who thinks that is mentally challenged or has never played Diablo 2/LOD.
Edit:
How is that naive? Users are the ones that give the most blatant and raw reviews, they say what they feel openly and when it is the majority it usually means a whole lot, generally it is unbiased. You actually trusting the reviews of the official critics is what really makes you the naive one. Like I said, they base their score on shallow criteria: Graphics(In a conventional sense), initial gameplay mechanics etc, not the end game. They don't delve deep into it. And most probably never even played Diablo 2/LOD.
The majority of the bad 'reviews' came during the shaky launch.
Woohaa56, I get what you're saying. But blizzard shouldn't have made that same mistake, especially 12 years since. They've developed greatly, have MUCH more resources, experince and time and this kind of talk like, 'it happened to D2, so D3 has the same right to suck', is complete nonesense. First of all, D2 didn't suck this bad in the beginning even. At least I wasn't bored with it in the first 5 days then, here I was already bored after 5 days and I didn't log in after a week, that's how much of a let down this is. 6-7 years of development and they give us this? No, man, just no, I'm sorry.
It only scored an 88 on Metacritic for instance. And 8.5 on Gamespot.
Those are pretty good scores, you know?
I don't get it, why do people think that those scores matter? What matters is the user score, that is the most accurate measure of the game's status. The sad thing is that the user score for Diablo 3 is 4.1 on metacritic, compared to the critic score that is 88. Critic score is based on shallow criteria. Sure the game is fun in the beginning. But Diablo is a game that is meant to be replayed over and over, kind of like Diablo 2/LOD was and that is where the USERS of the game have the final say of the quality of the end-product.
Face it, Diablo 3 is a mediocre game. And I do agree with the OP +1. Just get the refund, the only way blizzard will learn anything.
You do know that user scores are bullshit right? Sites like 4chan and various other troll sites encourge their users to actively post bad reviews of video games. Case in point, Mass Effect 3.
Saying to judge a game based on metacritic's or actually any site's user reviews is just a sign of your naivety.
Excuses excuses. Just read some of those reviews from casual users, many differ in their gripes but overall end up in that the game is mediocre. Have you visited the official Diablo 3 forums lately? Endless 'this is boring', 'I want a refund', 'how to get a refund', 'why Diablo is a flop' threads nonestop. It is evident, you can't make this shit up. And look at these forums, lower number of such threads but still. Case and point here. The game is fine for first run or two at most, but then it's meh. But it is SURE AS HELL not a Dibalo 2 killer, anyone who thinks that is mentally challenged or has never played Diablo 2/LOD.
Edit:
How is that naive? Users are the ones that give the most blatant and raw reviews, they say what they feel openly and when it is the majority it usually means a whole lot, generally it is unbiased. You actually trusting the reviews of the official critics is what really makes you the naive one. Like I said, they base their score on shallow criteria: Graphics(In a conventional sense), initial gameplay mechanics etc, not the end game. They don't delve deep into it. And most probably never even played Diablo 2/LOD.
The majority of the bad 'reviews' came during the shaky launch.
So why didn't the score improve since then? Instead it fell even more. Actually it never improved.
It only scored an 88 on Metacritic for instance. And 8.5 on Gamespot.
Those are pretty good scores, you know?
I don't get it, why do people think that those scores matter? What matters is the user score, that is the most accurate measure of the game's status. The sad thing is that the user score for Diablo 3 is 4.1 on metacritic, compared to the critic score that is 88. Critic score is based on shallow criteria. Sure the game is fun in the beginning. But Diablo is a game that is meant to be replayed over and over, kind of like Diablo 2/LOD was and that is where the USERS of the game have the final say of the quality of the end-product.
Face it, Diablo 3 is a mediocre game. And I do agree with the OP +1. Just get the refund, the only way blizzard will learn anything.
You do know that user scores are bullshit right? Sites like 4chan and various other troll sites encourge their users to actively post bad reviews of video games. Case in point, Mass Effect 3.
Saying to judge a game based on metacritic's or actually any site's user reviews is just a sign of your naivety.
Excuses excuses. Just read some of those reviews from casual users, many differ in their gripes but overall end up in that the game is mediocre. Have you visited the official Diablo 3 forums lately? Endless 'this is boring', 'I want a refund', 'how to get a refund', 'why Diablo is a flop' threads nonestop. It is evident, you can't make this shit up. And look at these forums, lower number of such threads but still. Case and point here. The game is fine for first run or two at most, but then it's meh. But it is SURE AS HELL not a Dibalo 2 killer, anyone who thinks that is mentally challenged or has never played Diablo 2/LOD.
Edit:
How is that naive? Users are the ones that give the most blatant and raw reviews, they say what they feel openly and when it is the majority it usually means a whole lot, generally it is unbiased. You actually trusting the reviews of the official critics is what really makes you the naive one. Like I said, they base their score on shallow criteria: Graphics(In a conventional sense), initial gameplay mechanics etc, not the end game. They don't delve deep into it. And most probably never even played Diablo 2/LOD.
The majority of the bad 'reviews' came during the shaky launch.
So why didn't the score improve since then? Instead it fell even more. Actually it never improved.
Because you would need way too many people to counteract the crazy amount of zeros spammed on that site.
It only scored an 88 on Metacritic for instance. And 8.5 on Gamespot.
Those are pretty good scores, you know?
I don't get it, why do people think that those scores matter? What matters is the user score, that is the most accurate measure of the game's status. The sad thing is that the user score for Diablo 3 is 4.1 on metacritic, compared to the critic score that is 88. Critic score is based on shallow criteria. Sure the game is fun in the beginning. But Diablo is a game that is meant to be replayed over and over, kind of like Diablo 2/LOD was and that is where the USERS of the game have the final say of the quality of the end-product.
Face it, Diablo 3 is a mediocre game. And I do agree with the OP +1. Just get the refund, the only way blizzard will learn anything.
You do know that user scores are bullshit right? Sites like 4chan and various other troll sites encourge their users to actively post bad reviews of video games. Case in point, Mass Effect 3.
Saying to judge a game based on metacritic's or actually any site's user reviews is just a sign of your naivety.
Excuses excuses. Just read some of those reviews from casual users, many differ in their gripes but overall end up in that the game is mediocre. Have you visited the official Diablo 3 forums lately? Endless 'this is boring', 'I want a refund', 'how to get a refund', 'why Diablo is a flop' threads nonestop. It is evident, you can't make this shit up. And look at these forums, lower number of such threads but still. Case and point here. The game is fine for first run or two at most, but then it's meh. But it is SURE AS HELL not a Dibalo 2 killer, anyone who thinks that is mentally challenged or has never played Diablo 2/LOD.
Edit:
How is that naive? Users are the ones that give the most blatant and raw reviews, they say what they feel openly and when it is the majority it usually means a whole lot, generally it is unbiased. You actually trusting the reviews of the official critics is what really makes you the naive one. Like I said, they base their score on shallow criteria: Graphics(In a conventional sense), initial gameplay mechanics etc, not the end game. They don't delve deep into it. And most probably never even played Diablo 2/LOD.
The majority of the bad 'reviews' came during the shaky launch.
So why didn't the score improve since then? Instead it fell even more. Actually it never improved.
Because you would need way too many people to counteract the crazy amount of zeros spammed on that site.
Yes, and that would only happen if people actually GENUINELY liked the game, that played the game thoroughly. You don't see that. Why do people spam zeroes? For fun? Is it a conspiracy? No, it is because it is a let down to have waited these 6-7 years for a great successor to end up with a dumed down version of Diablo 2 with WoW-like graphics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Easy to do, and easy to screw up the easy (naive) implementation and end up making a clbuttic programming error (google "clbuttic"). Even if they did filter certain words/phrases the spammers would catch on immediately and just work around it. Not a scalable solution.
No, shush. It makes him feel better thinking he's speaking for a majority of.. something.
JUST because I'm slow, and easily confused, are you telling me you think D2's pvp was balanced?
I suppose you don't understand what "scalable" means since you quoted it as if it were not a word, but the fact that it would have to be updated constantly means it isn't scalable. Thanks again to you for making off-the-cuff claims about things you don't understand.
Another issue of mine is the loot. I like the loot. I even like the idea a bit of how a perfectly rolled blue or rare could be better then an average Legendary. But I feel that Legendaries should already have a bigger advantage because they are actually rarer than rares. And along the same lines is the first boss kill loot. While it is being changed, I am not actually advancing past Normal on new characters and further on my other characters until they implement the guaranteed rare for first time boss kills per difficulty.
You're 100% retarded if you think D2 PVP was balanced in any way. Enigma and other retarded runewords post 1.10 patch just made things worse.
I don't get it, why do people think that those scores matter? What matters is the user score, that is the most accurate measure of the game's status. The sad thing is that the user score for Diablo 3 is 4.1 on metacritic, compared to the critic score that is 88. Critic score is based on shallow criteria. Sure the game is fun in the beginning. But Diablo is a game that is meant to be replayed over and over, kind of like Diablo 2/LOD was and that is where the USERS of the game have the final say of the quality of the end-product.
Face it, Diablo 3 is a mediocre game. And I do agree with the OP +1. Just get the refund, the only way blizzard will learn anything.
Edit: The score is 4.0 now and dropping. Vocal minority huh? Don't kid yourselves. Posters here that are raging at the OP are either in complete fanboy denial or you haven't clocked in 60 hours yet. Just wait. The RMAH will be the last nail in the coffin for this game, mark my words.
You do know that user scores are bullshit right? Sites like 4chan and various other troll sites encourge their users to actively post bad reviews of video games. Case in point, Mass Effect 3.
Saying to judge a game based on metacritic's or actually any site's user reviews is just a sign of your naivety.
Excuses excuses. Just read some of those reviews from casual users, many differ in their gripes but overall end up in that the game is mediocre. Have you visited the official Diablo 3 forums lately? Endless 'this is boring', 'I want a refund', 'how to get a refund', 'why Diablo is a flop' threads nonestop. It is evident, you can't make this shit up. And look at these forums, lower number of such threads but still. Case and point here. The game is fine for first run or two at most, but then it's meh. But it is SURE AS HELL not a Dibalo 2 killer, anyone who thinks that is mentally challenged or has never played Diablo 2/LOD.
Edit:
How is that naive? Users are the ones that give the most blatant and raw reviews, they say what they feel openly and when it is the majority it usually means a whole lot, generally it is unbiased. You actually trusting the reviews of the official critics is what really makes you the naive one. Like I said, they base their score on shallow criteria: Graphics(In a conventional sense), initial gameplay mechanics etc, not the end game. They don't delve deep into it. And most probably never even played Diablo 2/LOD.
Way to brush off my legit argument with "Excuses, excuses." Good to know you have nothing legit or concrete to bring to this table.
Legit argument? How is that a legit argument to say that heeding user reviews is naive? They're the most open and brutal, they show the players' real independent views, they don't work for anyone.
How do you know? Some of them don't even know english, some don't care for the forums. Why do you naturally assume that they are playing the game when they're not on the forums? You don't speak for them.
yes that's what you guys sound like if it was put into a different perspective.
Most of the games you guys talk about are old and have been out a good amount of time. There was alot wrong when they came out and it was addressed in patches or expansions along the way. Also, many people's memories of the games are skewed in the fact they glorify it. Would i go back and play golden eye because i think it was a better FPS game then battlefield 3 or MW3? Many of your complaints are gonna be addressed in future patches. If you'd even bothered to log on the past few days you'd know that many of the spammers have been banned. Legendaries are gonna be addressed, the whole quest thing is also gonna be addressed. Yes, i'm sure you'll find something else to complain about. The game you pictured was not what was released and your disappointed. No matter what they do to make this game better your not going to be happy with it because it's not what you wanted. I could care less how many people quit playing this game. The only thing i care about is if your going to complain atleast come up with good reasons or constructive criticism. Otherwise you just sound like that 6 yr old kid who wants a toy and his parents told him no.
The majority of the bad 'reviews' came during the shaky launch.
So why didn't the score improve since then? Instead it fell even more. Actually it never improved.
Because you would need way too many people to counteract the crazy amount of zeros spammed on that site.
Yes, and that would only happen if people actually GENUINELY liked the game, that played the game thoroughly. You don't see that. Why do people spam zeroes? For fun? Is it a conspiracy? No, it is because it is a let down to have waited these 6-7 years for a great successor to end up with a dumed down version of Diablo 2 with WoW-like graphics.