Many people to not agree with the ability to choose from whatever skills you have unlocked at any point in the game? By focusing on only a single set of skills, without re-speccing, I believe that many people are going to get burned because of their "build" expectations.
With the open beta, playing the Barbarian, I initially made the poor choice of picking a skill set and sticking with it (old school Diablo II mentality). I soon discovered the merits of alternating skills as the situation demanded, and thus my Wizard and Witch Doctor characters ended up stronger than my Barbarian.
Changing skill combinations, including the runes attached to them, is the way to go.
I'm waiting to see how people react to Inferno with their singular builds that they created before even seeing it!
No actual harm done, but, let me explain my view once more.
Technically, you are correct, Diablo 3 is a sequel to Diablo 2, which is a sequel to Diablo 1. They do indeed continue a storyline. However, the original post in this thread asked if Diablo 3 felt like a truer sequel to Diablo 1 then Diablo 2. The operational word however, is "feel". It's by definition not a logical thing. And it simply doesn't feel enough like something from the Diablo franchise. There are some possible reasons for it.
For example
Heck, I felt the same way moving from Diablo 1 to Diablo 2, thinking that the look just wasn't right. Anyone who knows me will remember that I even made the mistake of thinking that the Amazon would play the same as did the Rouge, and 2 weeks of play was utterly destroyed by my first ever encounter with Duriel.
I'm not going to make that same mistake again. And it is perhaps too early to judge whether or not it "feels" like a better sequel to D1 as did D2 to D1. Just as it took extended game time with D2 to get me to like it (which I didn't at the start), I'll wait untill I've played D3 beyond what the beta provided before I can make any respectable judgements on it.
Although I must point out that because of the beta, I am leaning towards liking it very much, if not more so than I did D2...
1) The development team is different this time around. This by necessity has caused a different design philosophy and different decisions then the original team
I do not recall exactly where I read this, but the original D2 team (Blizzard North) did start work on D3 as early as 2003, but their design decisions and direction (more WOW like than anything) would have resulted in an entirely new game, with almost nothing in common with D1 and D2. This, I believe, contributed to the project being completely scrapped, and eventually led to Blizzard North being shut down.
2) The time difference between first and second, and second and third is tripled. And the world has changed tremendously in that time, video games have gone through a lot of evolution.
The time difference between releases is explained because of the scrapping of the original D3 project and the closing of Blizzard North. The work on what eventually became the D3 that we know today started in 2005 (2006?), of which we know the first public announcement was made in 2008.
I don't even want to think of the amount of work that has gone into the development of D3, as concentrating too much on how they did it will distract from my enjoyment of the game. Needless to say though, there is far more detail present than ever before (thanks to the evolution of gaming technology), and applying that amount of detail logically will take more time.
3) There are a lot of decisions that gave me a certain ill feeling. The RMAH for example makes me feel as if the game is meant to leech money from players (let me emphasise to other readers, that you cannot argue with a feeling). Far worse then this is the decision to have the game only playable online and not having any support for Lan. I cannot help feel (no matter the protestations that it's for "security") that this was done to keep people on the Blizzard servers with ready access to the RMAH. That some people believe these measures are necessary for keeping the server up makes me want to become a hermit.
I originally did not like the idea of them not having offline Single Player or LAN play, and to a certain degree, still do not. But again, the beta come into play. My dislike of online only was somewhat tempered when I ran the Open Beta, and didn't notice the difference between offline or online.
To put it another way: If you take the absolute worst and slowest DSL internet connection available in the Americas, Europe (or anywhere else in the world for that matter), then you already have something better than the best that is available in South Africa. And I was still able to play without problems. In the time I was playingthe Open Beta, I only had a single timeout, and my statistics show that in a single hour, Diablo III generated between 8MB and 10MB of traffic during gameplay. Some of my friends whose line speed is less than 1/8 of mine also played without problems.
So what about the RMAH? Or even the GAH? It's a logical step from the vendors in D1 and D2. But this time, you're not buying from an in-game character, you're buying from a living, breathing person.
No biggie, really. I remember over the years, even playing offline, that I would sometimes find an item that I already had (for example), but with slightly better stats. So instead of getting rid of the first one by selling it in-game, my friends would bug me for a trade, and they would go so far as to offer me R100 or some other real-world object for it.
The RMAH is nothing new. The only difference that now Blizzard themselves would be benefitting from it, just as we would. And I am certain that whatever funding is generated through the RMAH will be diverted to improving the quality of the game, expansions, etc.
There were plenty of decisions to do with gameplay, some I agreed with (like being able to respec at will) and some I didn't.
What's wrong with respeccing? Being able to choose at will from whatever pool of skills are at your disposal is logic.
I'm (for example) a programmer who is fluent in Delphi/Pascal, Visual Basic, VBA, Command Line and HTML. Some projects require my skill with HTML while others need VBA, or even a combination of any one of them.
So why should my Wizard not be able to make those same choices? She uses "Ray Of Frost" and "Wave Of Force" primarily to get rid of the smaller monsters, but when she encounters a nastier monster, like a Tomb Guardian, or King Leoric, she doesn't have to endanger herself by using only those two skills. With all her training, she can pick whatever she wants, and use them whenever she wants. This time, "Arcane Torrent" gets added to the mix to destroy the demons. She wouldn't be a Wizard otherwise.
Because of all these factors and some more, Diablo 3 didn't feel like it was a part of the Diablo franchise. I am looking forward to it, I have enough friends playing that we're making our own clan. It seems like it will be a nice game, I plan to enjoy it. But it just doesn't feel like a "Diablo" game. I don't think any game will though, it's simply been too long.
Also, when I compare the Diablo games to eachother, I compare them based on the time they were released. I judge Diablo 1 based on gaming in 1996, and Diablo 2 based on gaming done in and around 2000. And I don't think that Diablo 3 will be as good as 1 and 2 when based on that criteria. Both of them were innovative for their age, bringing in new concepts and ideas. I do not believe Diablo 3 is innovative, except perhaps new ways of getting money from players
You're quite right, actually. Diablo 1 should be judged on gaming standards of 1996. Diablo 2 on the standards of 2000.
Diablo 3 should be judge on the stands of 2012, as it is rightly being judged.
We can't really judge yet how innovative D3 is, because nobody outside of Blizzard themselves have seen the game beyond the Skeleton King, so no-one can make that call. Let's all just wait until May 15th to play beyond Leoric before we make any judgement calls.
Personally? I believe that "We ain't seen nothin' yet!"
I consider Diablo 2 to be the sequel to Diablo 1. I do not consider Diablo 3 to be a sequel to either, it's a separate game that just happens to be made by the same company and with a similar name.
It's not that it's not a nice game, it is one. I just don't consider it as good as the former 2 (compared to their release time) and different enough that it's simply not the sequel.I still plan on enjoying it though.
Huh???
<snip>
I also do not believe that D3 is as good as D1 or D2. It's way better!, in more ways than can be put forth in this post without creating a wall of text.
<snip>
Anyone who claims D3 is not a sequel to either D1 or D2, is either lying or just not telling the truth. Diablo 3 should rather be named Diablo3., it's that much better than anything the previous games ever where.
There are so many things in your post that I disagreed with, but since I have neither the time nor inclination for such a thing I shall keep it short.
I do not appreciate being called a liar. It makes me think you're... well let's just say my opinion of you isn't at its most positive at the moment. Besides having given some very very good reasoning for my opinion, it is an opinion, just like everyone elses post on this subject. What you are doing is arguing that green is a better colour then red. It's tremendously stupid.
Also, you mistakenly thought this was about quality, it is not. It's whether people feel if Diablo 3 is a better sequel to 1 then 2, or if it is a sequel at all. Diablo could be the best game of the year, or in existence (I assure you, relatively few people believe this) and it would have little bearing whether it is considered a sequel to either game.
Please, learn to read.
My apologies, Ramsey, perhaps I could have worded my post a little differently. My statement of "is either lying or just not telling the truth" was intended to be wymsical, and not directed personally at you.
But your own statement of "and different enough that it's simply not the sequel" just didn't make any sens to me at all! Not the sequel? The definition of sequel:
A literary, dramatic, or cinematic work whose narrative continues that of a preexisting work.
or
a novel, play, etc., that continues a previously related story
As I understand it, that perfectly qualifies D3 as such, right? Diablo III is different enough to stand on it's own as a single entity, but it has enough similaries with the previous two games, and adds alot of it's own narrative to the story, that it can rightly be called a sequel.
Is (or will) Diablo III be the best game in existence as some believe? I don't know, it's still too early to make that judgement. Is Diablo III the best version of the game so far in the franchise? From what I've seen and experienced of the beta, most assuredly yes.
But again, my opologies if some statements in my earlier post was taken too personally.
I hope to see you online in the game world come May 15th...
I consider Diablo 2 to be the sequel to Diablo 1. I do not consider Diablo 3 to be a sequel to either, it's a separate game that just happens to be made by the same company and with a similar name.
It's not that it's not a nice game, it is one. I just don't consider it as good as the former 2 (compared to their release time) and different enough that it's simply not the sequel.I still plan on enjoying it though.
Huh???
Diablo III has taken as long as it has because (I believe) Blizzard have taken the best parts of the previous two games, and mixed them all together with a whole lot more content and lore. And also because of the amount of effort that has been put into detailing the story. Such amounts of detail cannot be slapped together in the amount of time that it took to go from D1 to D2 (4 years?).
Too many people think D3 started in 2008, when in fact, if you look at some of the early concept artwork, you can see development started as far back as 2003!
I also do not believe that D3 is as good as D1 or D2. It's way better!, in more ways than can be put forth in this post without creating a wall of text.
One point I will make is that Old Tristram in D3 looks more like Tristram did in D1 than that "Squared Off" town in D2.
I had more fun in the 19+ hours playing the D3 open beta than I ever did in the 11 years playing D2 and it's expansion. And all the while I even found some subtle and not-so-subtle references to both D1 and D2. If the Beta could impress me so, then I think the final release is going to be positively astounding!
Anyone who claims D3 is not a sequel to either D1 or D2, is either lying or just not telling the truth. Diablo 3 should rather be named Diablo3., it's that much better than anything the previous games ever where.
I'm certain that Inferno will be brutally hard. I haven't read a single comment saying "I'd like Inferno to be very manageable." We have Normal to Hell to have something challenging but possible. I wan't inferno to be damn near unrealistic to complete. I wan't a reason to play with max level character and to farm like crazy.
Anyone who isn't interested in playing at an extreme level has 3 other difficulties to satisfy them, so I see no reason why Inferno wouldn't be brutal.
I most definitely agree there. Once I've brought my characters up to 60, I'd want something that makes the days/weeks it took to get them there to mean something.
The Inferno I want to see is the kind where it takes me 2 months or so to complete Normal/Nightmare and Hell, and the same amount of time to get through Inferno Act 1....
I noticed with the open beta recently that Diablo III saves it's preferences and in-game screenshots to the "My Documents" folder/library. I didn't notice if there was a way internally to change this location to some other folder, so I came up with this solution:
1) Close Diablo III and any other related programs, such as the launcher.
2) Open your "My Pictures" folder (usually located at "%HOMEDRIVE%%HOMEPATH%\Pictures", which usually translates to "C:\Users\<YOUR USERNAME>\Pictures" if you haven't previously moved it somewhere else), and make a note of this path.
3) Open your "My Documents" folder (usually located at "%HOMEDRIVE%%HOMEPATH%\Documents", which usually translates to "C:\Users\<YOUR USERNAME>\Documents" if you haven't previously moved it somewhere else), and make a note of this path.
4) Copy the "Diablo III" folder and all subfolders to the folder of your choice. I copied mine to "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III"
5) Run the following commands in an adminstrative Command Prompt (Click Start, type "cmd" without quotes in the search box, right-click "cmd" in the results, click "Run As Adminstrator")
6) Optionally, if you want your Diablo III Screenshots to be displayed in your "My Pictures" folder/library, run the following commands in an adminstrative command prompt (you can safely use the same admin cmd from step (5) above.
D:
CD "\Pictures"
mklink /d "Diablo III Screenshots" "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III\Screenshots"
If all has gone well, the next time you run Diablo III, it will load (in my case) the "D3Prefs.txt" from "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III\D3Prefs.txt", and will save screenshots into the "Screenshots" subfolder at that same location. Also, opening "My Pictures" will give access to the screenshots folder via the "Diablo III Screenshots" Link.
If just in-case you don't fully understand the use of Links, remember that it's only a link, sort of like an advanced type of shortcut. Screenshots are saved in ONE LOCATION ONLY, and if "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III\Screenshots" is deleted, then the "Diablo III Screenshots" Link within "My Pictures" will stop working. As far as programs like "Windows Live Photo Gallery" or "Google Picasa 3" are concerned, the screenshots are saved in "D:\Pictures\Diablo III Screenshots"
If not, you can delete the "Diablo III" Link from "My Documents", and rename "___Diablo III___" back to "Diablo III" to restore the normal location.
4. Windows as an OS is basically flawed from the beginning, giving admin rights to every single application it runs (not like Linux), so there is no way to STOP bots from reading and writting to memory.
This is a flawed argument, for the following reasons:
1) Windows does NOT (at least, not Vista or 7) give admin rights to every application or service. If it does, then it's because the USER has said it's ok to do so. Heck, the first thing I do when installing Windows 7 for anyone, is to turn up UAC settings so that confirmation is required for any process that needs admin rights, exactly the way it works in Vista.
2) Without the ability to read from or write to memory, every single program in existance will no longer function. Regardless of OS. What the OS can do (and I'm sure Blizzard knows this), is prevent processes reading from or writing to another process' memory pool by isolating processes from one another, unless that process is attempting to write to it's own parent process (as often happens with multi threading). I'm no OS developer, but even so, some processes must be allowed to read from or write to the memory of another, or even the OS itself will not work.
This midnight release made me thinking, do I really want to stay all night to play D3? Will I be able to really enjoy it, to stay awake and have fun?
My first reaction to 00:01 release in Europe was - whoa, I'll stay till midnight and then play till the morning and maybe even longer... But, what's the point?
Wouldn't it be better to just chill? Go go bed normally, wake up, have a nice breakfast and then start playing?
Yeah, I'm a huge Diablo III fan, but I think I'll just wait till the morning.
What do you think, people?
Fortunately for me, timezone differences are in my favor! :Thumbs Up: Meaning that I'll be able to get a good night's sleep. I get up in the morning at about 07:00AM South Africa time, about the same time that the official launch will be happening at 12:01AM Europe Standard Time.
Chances are, I'll miss the "Midnight" launch my maybe at most 2 hours, as I'm expecting the courier service to knock on my door at about 09:00AM (or sooner) to deliver my pre-order which I made already way back in March.
If I've purchased the boxed copy, and have installed the game, will the DVD be required to be present in the drive in order to play (like Diablo II pre patch 1.13)? Or can I install the game, and keep the DVD locked away somewhere safe untill needed again a year later when I re-format my machine?
I can say with almost certainty that you won't be required to have the DVD in to actually play the game. It's that way for SC2 as well. I have a boxed copy but no DVD required to play after installation.
Thanks, CasMx, for the answer. I guess I can rest easy now (maybe - it's still a long wait 'till May 15th). The last thing I need to happen is to have the DVD get damaged from day-to-day use. I'd want my D3 DVD to be in mint condition 11 years from now in the same way that my D2 disks are (I had one copy to use, and another that was never used, to keep for posterity).
boxed copy, i like having the physical box and it adds to the shelf. Don't plan on staying up late to play, rather get good night sleep and wake up with a nice cup of coffee and play while fully awake and not droning like a zombie.
Oh, I concur. Having the boxed copy on the shelf somehow seems to make it a little more real.
I do, however, have one question though, bearing in mind that Diablo III will be online only:
If I've purchased the boxed copy, and have installed the game, will the DVD be required to be present in the drive in order to play (like Diablo II pre patch 1.13)? Or can I install the game, and keep the DVD locked away somewhere safe untill needed again a year later when I re-format my machine?
Is it just me or does the wizard seem pretty underpowered? granted its beta, 1/4th of act 1 and you didnt get any good gear, but compared to the other characters the wizard felt..... lacking. 3 arcane orbs and youre out of arcane power and forced to use signature spells which really dont do that much damage, and also dont work well in large packs. Say when youre against a tomb guardian and hes summoning more skeles. If youre initial spells dont clear a straight path to the tomb guardian, you might be in a longer fight than you bargained for. Hell, in a full game a full Ray of Frost wasnt enough to kill a single normal harvester.
i know the resource is suppost to be small and regen fast but it just didnt play well for the beta. maybe itwas my setup, i dont know. just really felt like most of the time i was spamming magic missile
And while it is true that my Witch Doctor ended up having higher DPS than my Wizard, I've chosen the Wizard to be my primary at release on May 15th, simply because of her power and some great crowd control skills.
I played the Open Beta first with the Barbarian, and while I had some extreme fun with the character, she wasn't was I expected, and only done the Skeleton King once before changing to the Wizard.
Which, I will say, was awsome, and even that description doesn't fully cover my experience with the Wizard. Her sheer arrogance in combat is a breath of fresh air. The Wizard will most defintely be my first character choice at release.
And my third Open Beta character was the Witch Doctor, which admitedly I played only to see what people are complaining about. And I don't understand why people are complaining! I had tons of fun with the Witch Doctor, far more than expected. The Witch Doctor will be my second character choice at released.
Here are the stats of the 3 characters I played in the Open Beta:
Ironically enough, most people was complaining that the Witch Doctor is a rubbish class. But as can clearly be seen, when I played the Witch Doctor, she ended up being the most powerful [in DPS] of my three characters.
As a result, this will be my character choices at release:
Wizard
Witch Doctor
Barbarian
It runs just fine on my work pc which dual boots Win 7 Pro and Win 8 Dev Preview. To be specific, it runs great on the Win 8 side also.
I'm defintely glad to hear that!
I don't want to have get Diablo III (when it's released), only to find out that it won't work on Windows 8. Which works quite nicely on Oracle Virtualbox...
I have not been fortunate enough to get into the Diablo III Beta, except for a few hours play that I had on a friends beta account when he was visiting from Ireland in December.
And for the most part, I was happy to learn that my computer (http://valid.canardp....php?id=2273747) would handle Diablo III on Windows 7 Ultimate x64.
But with the Windows 8 Consumer Preview download that will be available at about 16:00 SAST (09:00 EST) on February 29, 2012, I'll be curious to hear from those tech enthusiasts who will be trying Diablo III on Windows 8 CP...
How about making items purchased on the AH Bind-To-Account? That way you can stop people from buying items for 50,000 gold and within minutes re-selling them for 50,000,000 or more?
0
0
With the open beta, playing the Barbarian, I initially made the poor choice of picking a skill set and sticking with it (old school Diablo II mentality). I soon discovered the merits of alternating skills as the situation demanded, and thus my Wizard and Witch Doctor characters ended up stronger than my Barbarian.
Changing skill combinations, including the runes attached to them, is the way to go.
I'm waiting to see how people react to Inferno with their singular builds that they created before even seeing it!
0
I'm not going to make that same mistake again. And it is perhaps too early to judge whether or not it "feels" like a better sequel to D1 as did D2 to D1. Just as it took extended game time with D2 to get me to like it (which I didn't at the start), I'll wait untill I've played D3 beyond what the beta provided before I can make any respectable judgements on it.
Although I must point out that because of the beta, I am leaning towards liking it very much, if not more so than I did D2...
I do not recall exactly where I read this, but the original D2 team (Blizzard North) did start work on D3 as early as 2003, but their design decisions and direction (more WOW like than anything) would have resulted in an entirely new game, with almost nothing in common with D1 and D2. This, I believe, contributed to the project being completely scrapped, and eventually led to Blizzard North being shut down.
The time difference between releases is explained because of the scrapping of the original D3 project and the closing of Blizzard North. The work on what eventually became the D3 that we know today started in 2005 (2006?), of which we know the first public announcement was made in 2008.
I don't even want to think of the amount of work that has gone into the development of D3, as concentrating too much on how they did it will distract from my enjoyment of the game. Needless to say though, there is far more detail present than ever before (thanks to the evolution of gaming technology), and applying that amount of detail logically will take more time.
I'm glad that D3 has taken as long as it has.
I originally did not like the idea of them not having offline Single Player or LAN play, and to a certain degree, still do not. But again, the beta come into play. My dislike of online only was somewhat tempered when I ran the Open Beta, and didn't notice the difference between offline or online.
To put it another way: If you take the absolute worst and slowest DSL internet connection available in the Americas, Europe (or anywhere else in the world for that matter), then you already have something better than the best that is available in South Africa. And I was still able to play without problems. In the time I was playingthe Open Beta, I only had a single timeout, and my statistics show that in a single hour, Diablo III generated between 8MB and 10MB of traffic during gameplay. Some of my friends whose line speed is less than 1/8 of mine also played without problems.
So what about the RMAH? Or even the GAH? It's a logical step from the vendors in D1 and D2. But this time, you're not buying from an in-game character, you're buying from a living, breathing person.
No biggie, really. I remember over the years, even playing offline, that I would sometimes find an item that I already had (for example), but with slightly better stats. So instead of getting rid of the first one by selling it in-game, my friends would bug me for a trade, and they would go so far as to offer me R100 or some other real-world object for it.
The RMAH is nothing new. The only difference that now Blizzard themselves would be benefitting from it, just as we would. And I am certain that whatever funding is generated through the RMAH will be diverted to improving the quality of the game, expansions, etc.
What's wrong with respeccing? Being able to choose at will from whatever pool of skills are at your disposal is logic.
I'm (for example) a programmer who is fluent in Delphi/Pascal, Visual Basic, VBA, Command Line and HTML. Some projects require my skill with HTML while others need VBA, or even a combination of any one of them.
So why should my Wizard not be able to make those same choices? She uses "Ray Of Frost" and "Wave Of Force" primarily to get rid of the smaller monsters, but when she encounters a nastier monster, like a Tomb Guardian, or King Leoric, she doesn't have to endanger herself by using only those two skills. With all her training, she can pick whatever she wants, and use them whenever she wants. This time, "Arcane Torrent" gets added to the mix to destroy the demons. She wouldn't be a Wizard otherwise.
You're quite right, actually. Diablo 1 should be judged on gaming standards of 1996. Diablo 2 on the standards of 2000.
Diablo 3 should be judge on the stands of 2012, as it is rightly being judged.
We can't really judge yet how innovative D3 is, because nobody outside of Blizzard themselves have seen the game beyond the Skeleton King, so no-one can make that call. Let's all just wait until May 15th to play beyond Leoric before we make any judgement calls.
Personally? I believe that "We ain't seen nothin' yet!"
0
My apologies, Ramsey, perhaps I could have worded my post a little differently. My statement of "is either lying or just not telling the truth" was intended to be wymsical, and not directed personally at you.
But your own statement of "and different enough that it's simply not the sequel" just didn't make any sens to me at all! Not the sequel? The definition of sequel:
(http://www.thefreedi...nary.com/sequel)
or
As I understand it, that perfectly qualifies D3 as such, right? Diablo III is different enough to stand on it's own as a single entity, but it has enough similaries with the previous two games, and adds alot of it's own narrative to the story, that it can rightly be called a sequel.
Is (or will) Diablo III be the best game in existence as some believe? I don't know, it's still too early to make that judgement. Is Diablo III the best version of the game so far in the franchise? From what I've seen and experienced of the beta, most assuredly yes.
But again, my opologies if some statements in my earlier post was taken too personally.
I hope to see you online in the game world come May 15th...
0
Huh???
Diablo III has taken as long as it has because (I believe) Blizzard have taken the best parts of the previous two games, and mixed them all together with a whole lot more content and lore. And also because of the amount of effort that has been put into detailing the story. Such amounts of detail cannot be slapped together in the amount of time that it took to go from D1 to D2 (4 years?).
Too many people think D3 started in 2008, when in fact, if you look at some of the early concept artwork, you can see development started as far back as 2003!
I also do not believe that D3 is as good as D1 or D2. It's way better!, in more ways than can be put forth in this post without creating a wall of text.
One point I will make is that Old Tristram in D3 looks more like Tristram did in D1 than that "Squared Off" town in D2.
I had more fun in the 19+ hours playing the D3 open beta than I ever did in the 11 years playing D2 and it's expansion. And all the while I even found some subtle and not-so-subtle references to both D1 and D2. If the Beta could impress me so, then I think the final release is going to be positively astounding!
Anyone who claims D3 is not a sequel to either D1 or D2, is either lying or just not telling the truth. Diablo 3 should rather be named Diablo3., it's that much better than anything the previous games ever where.
0
I most definitely agree there. Once I've brought my characters up to 60, I'd want something that makes the days/weeks it took to get them there to mean something.
The Inferno I want to see is the kind where it takes me 2 months or so to complete Normal/Nightmare and Hell, and the same amount of time to get through Inferno Act 1....
0
1) Close Diablo III and any other related programs, such as the launcher.
2) Open your "My Pictures" folder (usually located at "%HOMEDRIVE%%HOMEPATH%\Pictures", which usually translates to "C:\Users\<YOUR USERNAME>\Pictures" if you haven't previously moved it somewhere else), and make a note of this path.
3) Open your "My Documents" folder (usually located at "%HOMEDRIVE%%HOMEPATH%\Documents", which usually translates to "C:\Users\<YOUR USERNAME>\Documents" if you haven't previously moved it somewhere else), and make a note of this path.
4) Copy the "Diablo III" folder and all subfolders to the folder of your choice. I copied mine to "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III"
5) Run the following commands in an adminstrative Command Prompt (Click Start, type "cmd" without quotes in the search box, right-click "cmd" in the results, click "Run As Adminstrator")
D:
CD "\Documents"
REN "Diablo III" "___Diablo III___"
mklink /d "Diablo III" "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III"
6) Optionally, if you want your Diablo III Screenshots to be displayed in your "My Pictures" folder/library, run the following commands in an adminstrative command prompt (you can safely use the same admin cmd from step (5) above.
D:
CD "\Pictures"
mklink /d "Diablo III Screenshots" "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III\Screenshots"
If all has gone well, the next time you run Diablo III, it will load (in my case) the "D3Prefs.txt" from "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III\D3Prefs.txt", and will save screenshots into the "Screenshots" subfolder at that same location. Also, opening "My Pictures" will give access to the screenshots folder via the "Diablo III Screenshots" Link.
If just in-case you don't fully understand the use of Links, remember that it's only a link, sort of like an advanced type of shortcut. Screenshots are saved in ONE LOCATION ONLY, and if "D:\Downloads\Games\Diablo\Diablo III\Screenshots" is deleted, then the "Diablo III Screenshots" Link within "My Pictures" will stop working. As far as programs like "Windows Live Photo Gallery" or "Google Picasa 3" are concerned, the screenshots are saved in "D:\Pictures\Diablo III Screenshots"
If not, you can delete the "Diablo III" Link from "My Documents", and rename "___Diablo III___" back to "Diablo III" to restore the normal location.
For more information on how links work, visit the following websites:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_link#Windows_7_.26_Vista_symbolic_link
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc753194(v=ws.10).aspx
Personally, I'd prefer some other in-game means of changing the location of where the preferences and screenshots get saved...
0
This is a flawed argument, for the following reasons:
1) Windows does NOT (at least, not Vista or 7) give admin rights to every application or service. If it does, then it's because the USER has said it's ok to do so. Heck, the first thing I do when installing Windows 7 for anyone, is to turn up UAC settings so that confirmation is required for any process that needs admin rights, exactly the way it works in Vista.
2) Without the ability to read from or write to memory, every single program in existance will no longer function. Regardless of OS. What the OS can do (and I'm sure Blizzard knows this), is prevent processes reading from or writing to another process' memory pool by isolating processes from one another, unless that process is attempting to write to it's own parent process (as often happens with multi threading). I'm no OS developer, but even so, some processes must be allowed to read from or write to the memory of another, or even the OS itself will not work.
0
Fortunately for me, timezone differences are in my favor! :Thumbs Up: Meaning that I'll be able to get a good night's sleep. I get up in the morning at about 07:00AM South Africa time, about the same time that the official launch will be happening at 12:01AM Europe Standard Time.
Chances are, I'll miss the "Midnight" launch my maybe at most 2 hours, as I'm expecting the courier service to knock on my door at about 09:00AM (or sooner) to deliver my pre-order which I made already way back in March.
0
Thanks, CasMx, for the answer. I guess I can rest easy now (maybe - it's still a long wait 'till May 15th). The last thing I need to happen is to have the DVD get damaged from day-to-day use. I'd want my D3 DVD to be in mint condition 11 years from now in the same way that my D2 disks are (I had one copy to use, and another that was never used, to keep for posterity).
0
Oh, I concur. Having the boxed copy on the shelf somehow seems to make it a little more real.
I do, however, have one question though, bearing in mind that Diablo III will be online only:
If I've purchased the boxed copy, and have installed the game, will the DVD be required to be present in the drive in order to play (like Diablo II pre patch 1.13)? Or can I install the game, and keep the DVD locked away somewhere safe untill needed again a year later when I re-format my machine?
0
You kidding, right?
If you read a post I made on another topic (http://www.diablofans.com/topic/39649-beta-my-thoughts-on-classes/page__p__840497#entry840497) you'll know that I played Barbarian, Wizard and Witch Doctor on the Open Beta, in that order.
And while it is true that my Witch Doctor ended up having higher DPS than my Wizard, I've chosen the Wizard to be my primary at release on May 15th, simply because of her power and some great crowd control skills.
0
Which, I will say, was awsome, and even that description doesn't fully cover my experience with the Wizard. Her sheer arrogance in combat is a breath of fresh air. The Wizard will most defintely be my first character choice at release.
And my third Open Beta character was the Witch Doctor, which admitedly I played only to see what people are complaining about. And I don't understand why people are complaining! I had tons of fun with the Witch Doctor, far more than expected. The Witch Doctor will be my second character choice at released.
Here are the stats of the 3 characters I played in the Open Beta:
Witch Doctor
Name: Alexis
Level: 11
Strength: 20
Dexterity: 31
Intelligence: 58
Vitality: 30
Armor: 213
DPS: 43.94
Wizard
Name: Candice
Level: 13
Strength: 31
Dexterity: 30
Intelligence: 62
Vitality: 56
Armor: 239
DPS: 38.92
Barbarian
Name: Hathor
Level: 11
Strength: 51
Dexterity: 33
Intelligence: 21
Vitality: 41
Armor: 306
DPS: 25.15
Ironically enough, most people was complaining that the Witch Doctor is a rubbish class. But as can clearly be seen, when I played the Witch Doctor, she ended up being the most powerful [in DPS] of my three characters.
As a result, this will be my character choices at release:
Wizard
Witch Doctor
Barbarian
0
I'm defintely glad to hear that!
I don't want to have get Diablo III (when it's released), only to find out that it won't work on Windows 8. Which works quite nicely on Oracle Virtualbox...
0
And for the most part, I was happy to learn that my computer (http://valid.canardp....php?id=2273747) would handle Diablo III on Windows 7 Ultimate x64.
But with the Windows 8 Consumer Preview download that will be available at about 16:00 SAST (09:00 EST) on February 29, 2012, I'll be curious to hear from those tech enthusiasts who will be trying Diablo III on Windows 8 CP...
Don't hold back - tell it like it is!
EDIT: Added date