Quote from Ruppgu
I'm a bit split on their design of not nerfing any abilities. On one hand, it's nice that they aren't touching builds that people currently find enjoyable. However, on the other hand, if they truely want build diversity, you need to nerf things. Battle Rage is a perfect example... it's just too powerful and is something you pretty much always want in your build.
Either way, I think a few of the mentioned buffs to skills seem a bit too much. 400% damage on smash? Are you kidding me?
Battle Rage is not used in every build. A better example would be Warcry with the resist rune.
0
0
If I have skills A, B, C, D, E, and F.... Does your calculation count the skill set up of F, E, D, C, B, and A different from the former?
0
Clearly you misread that person you quoted, since that would NOT be awesome. The person you quoted said that maybe Blizzard decided they didn't need closed beta. "Awesome!" Lol no.
As for the OP, yes, another wave went out. And of course they'll invite F&F over public. It's always been that way.
The easiest way to think about it is imagine Blizzard has 3 pools of people. The first pool is F&F. The second pool is press. The third pool is public. Whenever Blizzard decides they need more people testing, they pull from the F&F pool. When that pool is finally depleted, then they'll pull from the other two.
A line metaphor works here, also. F&F is simply at the front of the line.
It wasn't just EU. Lots of NA got their invites tonight as well. Cough. Cough. Smile.
0
How am I trolling? I'm on the F&F invite list and waiting. I have been since two days prior to F&F release. And tell me, why would they invite closed beta when F&F are still waiting?
You can choose not to believe me if you want. It isn't going to make closed beta start any sooner.
Edit: You are a fool to assume they simply mass invited all the F&F. They activate in chunks, and for good reason. Just look at the server stability even now.
0
False info isn't false.
Edit: I should clarify. The "not finished" isn't false. The "won't start until" is assumed.
0
0
0
It does the game no harm.
I do think the more obscure reference though, the better.
0
They knew about the leaks and information because they've had access to the client for a while. Think of an account needing two different flags. The 1st flag is the ability to download the client (press has likely had this for a while), the 2nd flag is the ability to log into the server. Either that, or they simply knew about the public link to the client beforehand. Regardless, they've had the client, just not the ability to access servers.
As far as when the beta starts, I think the simplest way to think about it is that there is no set F&F, media, and public betas. It's all one beta, and they are rolling out invites over time. The biggest difference between these 3 groups is simple priority. They won't start inviting people who opted in until all the F&F people have been invited. The media is likely mixed in the middle of that. We are all in a line for the roller coaster. F&F folks simply have the deluxe passes that let them all cut.
0
As in 100 wouldn't be the cap in this list. There is something greater than 100.
0
Diablo 2 economy would still fail without dupes. Just as the poster above me said, SoJs would just replace the runes. Either way we are stuck using in game items as a de facto currency since the gold system is broken.
At least with the dupes we can have runewords. I seriously doubt most of you would actually enjoy it with dupes gone (or even worse with no hacks and no bots). We've all become accustomed to being able to actually build our characters.
0
0
Final Fantasy VII - Released 1997
Metal Gear Solid - Released 1998
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past - Released 1991
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time - Released 1998
Resident Evil - Released 1996
Tomb Raider - Released 1996
Super Mario 64 - Released 1996
dec⋅ade [dek-eyd; Brit. also duh-keyd]
1. a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
You should read the thread before you post in it.
PS 1996 - 1998 was a sick time for video games.
0
Actually it is.
"the plot or succession of incidents of a novel, poem, drama, etc."
You search for demons. You fight them. <- Succession of incidents.
0
Because the website went down (for me currently, at least) I don't really know what their criteria was for choosing the games. And unless you went and read through their lists and their reasons, you don't either.
So, we can only make an assumption. I see most of you harping on story as if it were the only criteria for what makes a game note-worthy. That is likely not the only thing taken into consideration. Graphics, replayability, innovation, control mastering, and mainstream acceptance are all probably important factors.
That's particularly why I am surprised Halo is not on this list. Overlooked perhaps. Halo and WoW both played the same important role: they because very mainstream. People who didn't play video games at least played a bit of Halo. And people who never touched an MMO played WoW. SotC was an incredibly innovative game. I know of no other like it, and it was widely successful. Portal brought a new (before some of you people harp on this, yes, I know the concept was from Narbacular Drop) mechanic to the videogame world, as did HL2 which had a fabulous story with it.
While I, too, think the list is total bullshit (not sure why SSB:M is so far up the list, when it spawned with it worldwide competition) I think you all shouldn't be so quick to jump on the D2#1 and everything else sucks bandwagon.
PS Don_guillotine
Diablo's story: Medieval warriors fight demons who break free from hell. Sorry, but the story is no more unique than WoW's.