DiabloFans

Quote from KageKaze

I gotta say I'm very disappointed in the YouTube comments. People are obviously not good at reading video descriptions or noticing the enhanced stats that were even shown in the video. Everyone is just assuming the Legendary Update is "new sparkles"

I think we're well past the point where YouTube comments for anything will be something other than an embarrasment to the species.

Blizzard releases a game you didn't like as much as you thought you would. Explanation:

1. BLIZZARD CONSPIRACY!
2. BLIZZARD LIES!
3. BLIZZARD HAS DIFFERENT IDEAS THAN ME ABOUT WHAT MAKES A GAME GOOD, AND THAT MAKES THEM WRONG!
4. NOT EVERYTHING BLIZZARD MAKES WILL FEEL TAILOR-MADE FOR ME, BUT THAT'S LIFE!

lol. Just kidding about that last one. It's completely unreasonable.

...

Why do people need to construct such baroque narratives in which to couch their disappointment?

Quote from Visioned

Quote from Catalept

Oh joy! Another troll-thread complaining about how Blizzard isn't listening to The Right People.

The internet definitely needs more of those.

I don't want them to listen to me. I have no suggestions. I will allow you to retract your statement. Not exactly a troll thread.

I retract my statement. It was made on the assumption that you were suggesting that the health-reset change should be reverted.

I'm not sure how I leapt to such a tenuous conclusion... except for the bit where you wished physical harm on the person who made it. I guess a more reasonable person would have seen that as a sign of violent indifference or something.

Quote from Greavers

Dude stop trolling this post, this guy is serious and he has a good point. It's quite obvious, d3 wont be nearly as good as d2 ever was.

The thread title is "Diablo III is dead.".

It was originally a poll with several options, all variants on "I agree".

The OP vehemently opposes (to the extent of rhetorically invoking harm on the perpetrator) the sanity-restoring change of removing health resets.

You're right. We need more threads full of good points and seriousness like this one is.

Oh joy! Another troll-thread complaining about how Blizzard isn't listening to The Right People.

The internet definitely needs more of those.

Incoming hysteria from people with no idea what hashcodes are in 5... 4...

Quote from Zakaz

Quote from Number1337

Edit: Cats > Dogs.

No. Show me a cat cuter than this:

... does the cat need to have been hit in the face with a shovel, too?

Part of the problem is the AH (OH GOD, IT'S TRUE!) Blizzard's D3 announcements have to be of sufficient clarity and definitiveness that the AH has time to adjust. Letting people offload soon-to-be obsolete gear and giving them time to tool up for new changes is Very Good Idea. Unfortunately, that means that 'musing aloud' is pretty much off the table unless it's to get player feedback well in advance of any actual changes.

Because of that, I interpret Blizzard's current (and far from atypical) silence to mean that they've pretty much decided what to change, and how to change it, but they're still not close to having enough details to make a market-friendly announcement.

If either the skills overhaul or the legendaries overhaul was going to be just a matter of tweaking coefficients and bumping up stats, I'd have expected them to say so by now. Hopefully that means they're going to completely rework at least a few skills for each class (and I think we'd all have a fairly predictable list of what are, at the moment, total duds), and we already know there's some super-secret shenanigans going on with legendaries.

I can't help wondering if the two are going to be suprisingly intertwined somehow, because otherwise I just can't see the sense in insisting that 1.04 has both sets of major changes at once.

Step 1: Buy 50m worth of gear
Step 2: Get to Diablo
Step 3: Buy 660k worth of gear
Step 4: Kill Diablo

Quote from overneathe

Quote from Catalept

Rubberbanding 101:

When you want to send crap over the internet, you've basically got two choices: TCP or UDP. TCP guarantees that every packet you send will be received by the server in the order you sent it, and vice versa. But it's slower. UDP is much faster but guarantees nothing. Most games (including SC2 and D3) use UDP.

Under normal operation, your client sends a packet updating your position, then moves you to that position in anticipation of the server receiving the packet, and sending one back to the client which tells it where your character actually is (because the server is the ultimate authority), which is usally exactly the same (or close enough) to where the client predicted it would be. This is basically how client-side prediction works, and makes things look nice and smooth.

However, because D3 uses UDP, sometimes those packets will simply not arrive, or will arrive out of order, in which case the client-side prediction breaks down, and the client and server disagree on where your character should be. In this case, the client will 'snap' your character back to where the server said it should be. Because the disagreement was caused by missing packets, you character will almost invariably end up where it was when the packets started vanishing, typically less than a second ago.

So yeah.

Very nice explanation.

What would you say, as an informed person, is the solution to the issue? And would it have been better for D3 to run on TCP?

It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. The tradeoff here is more reliability for higher latency (and bandwidth, which is very important if you're running a giant server farm). However, it's important to realise that UDP itself isn't prone to packet loss. Packet loss happens no matter what. If D3 used a TCP connection, instead of rubberbanding, your could wander off into an area that appeared to have no monsters, then the server would finally get the location data from your client and tell the client that a large group of monsters appeared there and started attacking you 0.4 seconds ago. UDP is probably the best bad solution.

Quote from MasterFischer

So how exactly do you gauge an items true gold worth, if there are 4 items on the AH similar to yours, but they aer all stupidly overpriced ?

From a purely theoretical point of view, an item's 'true gold worth' is equal to the amount of gold you could have farmed in the time it took to find that item (or something of the same or greater value), minus the value of any items you found while doing so. That's basically the opportunity cost of farming the item (or something that could be directly exchanged for it) vs. buying it straight off the AH. Problematically, this is a somewhat recursive definition

Of course, there's a huge difference between 'true gold worth' and what people will actually pay. The most fundamental truth of economics is that humans are irrational actors... anyone who says otherwise is selling something, or has just discovered An Incredibly Profound Truth that happens to flatter their sensibilities and bears no relation to reality.

People will pay an Impatience Premium, or accrue Indifference Bonuses. They will differ wildly on the value they ascribe to items, or gold itself, because they misunderstand game mechanics or probability.

So, given all that annoying complexity, you calculate an item's market value the same way people have always done... looking at what other people are selling stuff for, then making a guess

This community has, at best, 10K active users. 44% are on the fence or dislike the patch. Making it 4.4k people complaining. (I know the community itself is larger, only shooting for members who *own* the game - if someone has more valid numbers, let me know).

Even if you extrapolate that there are at least 10 fansites with 10k active posters, and Battle.net with 50k (being way generous), and extending that by accepting those users mentioned actually *own* Diablo 3 (since any other comments are opinions are worthless), you come up with 69K users complaining.

Again 7MIL+ purchases. At least that many, since we haven't had any news of additional sales since 1 week in. But again, being generous, as smaller total sales inflates the percentage.

Making it .0098% of active users vocally throwing a fit. Otherwise - a vocal minority.

Being fair, .0098% will translate into some larger % of the userbase being happy, that's how surveying a valid sample size works. Be very clear, however - the number of people playing the game is *far* larger than the number of people trolling these forums running on about how terrible the game is. Far to many entitled crybabies who, instead of accepting that not every game satisfies every need and moving on, think that they have to get back at Blizzard, and drive as many people as possible from the game.

It makes me sad that this is the state of gaming. Used to be, we looked at the box and if the features sounded like they would be fun we would try it. If it sucked, we tried again. If it was broke we returned it.

Now, thanks to mindless repetition of game series like CoD and Halo and MWx, people are so used to always getting exactly what they expect (because the games never truly change) that anytime a game comes out they don't like, they go running off raging. EA made it that much worse when they caved regarding the end of ME3. Players didn't make they game, they play it. EA screwed developers by setting the precedent that developers are just slaves to players now, and meant only to generate profit. And thanks to them and players like the ones that overpopulate these forums, you can expect the quality and uniqueness of games to deteriorate going forward. Because only the independently wealthy studios will continue to be able to make games as they want. The rest will be relegated to spamming out clones for the mindless drones this new generation of gamers has become.

For every person who does this - I hope life takes something away from you unfairly, to teach you some perspective. And maybe make you mature a bit.

EDIT: clarity, maths