I remember in D1 and D2 when i found Rare item, i was happy because it was RARE, also Legendary items were really Legendary and both was actually useful and wearable... D3 because of AH/RMAH loot is set to Rare=common, legendary=common and both on 99% craps that even vendor dont want...
Those rose tinted glasses, uh? Or maybe you just jumped on the "I played D2" bandwagon without even bothering to maybe google some info before.
Doing countless Baal runs with guaranteed unique items (there were no "legendaries", just uniques)? An hour of D2 gave you way more unique items than you will ever see in an hour of D3. The amount of rares was smaller, yep; they're gonna fix that in D3, btw. However, it's not like every rare or unique was an update, hell no.
Even Baal on hell difficulty could drop "normal" uniques that were pure crap (remember the three levels of quality for uniques - normal, exceptional, elite). And the fact that rares felt like "yay" and not like "meh" as in D3 is because they weren't just worth 2k-3k gold at the vendor, but if they had this one single affix that everyone was looking for (+x to skill level) you could sell them for up to the gold limit and go to Gheed to have another shot at gambling. Rares without the skill level attribute were crap for 99% of players.
And due to work reasons I'm on a D3 break, but to be honest, I'm also not motivated to come back right now; might be waiting for 1.08 or a later patch. But I had the same ups and downs with D2, too, and I really don't think we should romanticize D2 to a game it never was. When you say "legendary items were really legendary and both useful and wearable"... well, that's just not true; you would find unique items (sometimes even set items) within the first hour of a new game and they were crap, going right to the vendor.
^ you might wanna read this guy's post in detail.
Look, I'm actually really frustrated that the console gets a lot of things I would've wanted to see on the PC version.
one day someone at blizzard will come up with a way to stop any sort of the trouble that offline mode brings on the PC and that will be a good day for Diablo. Sadly I don't think that day will ever come.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Bashiok - Blizzard Representative - 08/01/2011 -"So how many skill combinations are there now? Well taking into account 6 active skills, all the rune combinations, and 3 passives we currently expect each class to have roughly 2,285,814,795,264 different build combinations."
"Hey, I thought you'd like the witty irony of grub-on-glowie violence!"
*Normally keep on the down low to avoid cross site issues*
I'm from Diablo Expressions (did an interview as well, yet to be posted, will let you know when is Zero(pS)
I can 99.9% confirm you can. While on the 35-40 minutes of testing and playing on the demon hunter I got pretty good at laying down traps mid dodge roll away from an enemy.
Now while it's not an actually attack such as the bola shot they had ridged up, its still an ACTION your doing mid roll, and on another note completely, there is no system to hinder dodge right now, so you could dodge roll effectively forever.
Can answer some more questions if ya got any; glad to help.
Are you referring only to being able to dodge a different direction than attacking (not what I was talking about) or can you truly move and attack different directions? If you can, then how exactly does targeting work to allow this?
Caltrops is an action with no delay on PC so you can already use it while moving or even mid Vault and whatnot without stopping movement. Do you know if any attacks that would normally cause you to stop moving on PC are allowed to be used while moving on the PS3?
I wish I could truly, 100% answer this but can't. Don't want to say yay or nay without remebering for a fact. What I can comment on is since your using the Left-Analog stick for movement, and the Right Analog stick for dodge, the Trigger abilities would be the easiest ones to use without having your hand get all jointed up, so in the vent you can (sorry again, can't remember for 100 fact) only your trigger abilitites will be pulled of effectively.
I'm curious as o how much control there is over which enemy you are targetting, is it just the closest one in the rough direction you are facing?
Its as good as you can direct with th analog stick to be honest, better you get, better accuracy you'll get. Also, there's something that I can't spoil, but there is something else to aid you. Appears that noone else caught this b me, or the interviews didn't really play it as if they were testers : D
I think people will be surprised how much being able to play offline won't effect the quality of the game at all and will only slightly effect it's accessibility. Also even with 1.0.8 and beyond itemization changes the AH will still be desirable which puts console players at a disadvantage since they apparently do not have one.
When thinking rationally one would probably assume even before the announcement that there would be some pros to the console version compared to the PC version. However when you take the tin foil hat off there is really nothing at all that implicates or supports the theory of Diablo III being meant for consoles. Also to be expected is for people to buy the game and reach level 4 and say the game feels so much better and natural on Playstation. May I refer you to the people who also reached level 4 in Guild Wars 2, SWTOR, Age of Conan, and Vanguard that said those games were far superior to WoW and would dominate it in subscriptions numbers by X date. Turn the monster power up on in Inferno then report back on how dodging a Molten, Mortar, Plagued combo felt so smooth on the Playstation. I can't verify as I have not played the console version, so maybe it will.
And here's my final tidbit for the tinfoil wearers. So let's say Blizzard designed the game around spending $$ on the RMAH. However, the plan all along was to make the game better for the console. So now everyone buys the game for console yet there is no RMAH.????? How does that work. Sure they made more money from console sales but how does that substitute the monthly fee? Every game is required to have a monthly fee in order to be profitable.
And here's my final tidbit for the tinfoil wearers. So let's say Blizzard designed the game around spending $$ on the RMAH. However, the plan all along was to make the game better for the console. So now everyone buys the game for console yet there is no RMAH.????? How does that work. Sure they made more money from console sales but how does that substitute the monthly fee? Every game is required to have a monthly fee in order to be profitable.
I'm sure people will try and come up with something like "They're just milking PC players while the game was beta tested on it, while being designed for console all along". You can't win these fights. Trust me, I've been doing this a long time.
I haven't read Kotaku for ages. I actually STFUd and read that whole article and now I remember why that was the first time in a while I'd gone there.
He had an opportunity to really do a great interview with Mosqueira and Berger and we ended up with some very low-quality "reporting" which had this absurd stream-of-consciousness quality to it as opposed to an article that had been written, revised, and edited until a publishable product was reached.
But that's typically what you get from Kotaku because they're more concerned with being "first" as opposed to being "right." Sadly that article did nothing to give me any significant insight into the console version - not that I'm going to buy it anyway, I'm merely curious.
And here's my final tidbit for the tinfoil wearers. So let's say Blizzard designed the game around spending $$ on the RMAH. However, the plan all along was to make the game better for the console. So now everyone buys the game for console yet there is no RMAH.????? How does that work. Sure they made more money from console sales but how does that substitute the monthly fee? Every game is required to have a monthly fee in order to be profitable.
I'm sure people will try and come up with something like "They're just milking PC players while the game was beta tested on it, while being designed for console all along". You can't win these fights. Trust me, I've been doing this a long time.
Now you're just helping them by giving the ideas baked already...
Assuming that the auto-targetting system makes it harder to choose which enemy you target and the lack of an AH of any kind it looks like console players could find higher MPs in Inferno a real challenge as they will pretty much be playing self found.
Also Kotaku pretty much is the Daily Mail of gaming news, but at least it isn't CinemaBlend, I feel bad everytime I accidental click a CinemaBlend link and give them an additional page-view.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
^ you might wanna read this guy's post in detail.
Agreed to me, in particular, the offline mode.
Bashiok - Blizzard Representative - 08/01/2011 -"So how many skill combinations are there now? Well taking into account 6 active skills, all the rune combinations, and 3 passives we currently expect each class to have roughly 2,285,814,795,264 different build combinations."
"Hey, I thought you'd like the witty irony of grub-on-glowie violence!"
I wish I could truly, 100% answer this but can't. Don't want to say yay or nay without remebering for a fact. What I can comment on is since your using the Left-Analog stick for movement, and the Right Analog stick for dodge, the Trigger abilities would be the easiest ones to use without having your hand get all jointed up, so in the vent you can (sorry again, can't remember for 100 fact) only your trigger abilitites will be pulled of effectively.
This is important, will do some looking into.
Its as good as you can direct with th analog stick to be honest, better you get, better accuracy you'll get. Also, there's something that I can't spoil, but there is something else to aid you. Appears that noone else caught this b me, or the interviews didn't really play it as if they were testers : D
When thinking rationally one would probably assume even before the announcement that there would be some pros to the console version compared to the PC version. However when you take the tin foil hat off there is really nothing at all that implicates or supports the theory of Diablo III being meant for consoles. Also to be expected is for people to buy the game and reach level 4 and say the game feels so much better and natural on Playstation. May I refer you to the people who also reached level 4 in Guild Wars 2, SWTOR, Age of Conan, and Vanguard that said those games were far superior to WoW and would dominate it in subscriptions numbers by X date. Turn the monster power up on in Inferno then report back on how dodging a Molten, Mortar, Plagued combo felt so smooth on the Playstation. I can't verify as I have not played the console version, so maybe it will.
And here's my final tidbit for the tinfoil wearers. So let's say Blizzard designed the game around spending $$ on the RMAH. However, the plan all along was to make the game better for the console. So now everyone buys the game for console yet there is no RMAH.????? How does that work. Sure they made more money from console sales but how does that substitute the monthly fee? Every game is required to have a monthly fee in order to be profitable.
Ok, I'm done. Hopefully some people got my point.
I'm sure people will try and come up with something like "They're just milking PC players while the game was beta tested on it, while being designed for console all along". You can't win these fights. Trust me, I've been doing this a long time.
Ha. Bagstone.
He had an opportunity to really do a great interview with Mosqueira and Berger and we ended up with some very low-quality "reporting" which had this absurd stream-of-consciousness quality to it as opposed to an article that had been written, revised, and edited until a publishable product was reached.
But that's typically what you get from Kotaku because they're more concerned with being "first" as opposed to being "right." Sadly that article did nothing to give me any significant insight into the console version - not that I'm going to buy it anyway, I'm merely curious.
Ha. Bagstone.
Also Kotaku pretty much is the Daily Mail of gaming news, but at least it isn't CinemaBlend, I feel bad everytime I accidental click a CinemaBlend link and give them an additional page-view.