DiabloFans

Quote from romique

Quote from LordRayken

The Tristram in Diablo 2 was exactly the same as the Tristram in Diablo 1.

No, it wasn't.





Both pictures were posted by Aerisot in this and another thread, I place them here together for comparison.
IMO the D2 Tristram looks like a simplified copy, when the D3 Tristram resembles how the town could really look after another 20 years.

Quote from LordRayken

Honestly, if you match up Diablo 1's Tristram with Diablo 3's they do not match by much at all.

The main buildings are in place and look the same, Adria's hut seems to be in place also. I don't know what you are talking about.

Since you don't know what I'm talking about, I'll be more clear.

The size, shape, scale, and distance between buildings is entirely off. The walking distance and shape of the buildings is a vague representation at best of the buildings from Diablo 1.

The well is gigantic and off place, it's not centered and the buildings are not positioned properly or aligned around it. The prison cage from Diablo 2 is not in the same location and is oddly placed as well.

The Cathedral is not the proper distance, angle, or size. It's not relative to the location from Tristram in Diablo 1 at all. Adrias hut is about the only thing that could vaguely be said to be in the right position or angle from the town.

As for the town itself, it has additional buildings that were not present in the original Diablo 1, while also missing some buildings that were present in the main town/settlement area. It has additional water wells and The Tavern of the Rising Sun also seems to have been given a basement/cellar that was not there before in Diablo 1 or Diablo 2.

There are several other issues with Tristram as it is represented in Diablo 3, and the Cathedral in particular.

The Tristram in Diablo 2 was an almost exact replica because the engine they used for Diablo 2 was much more recognizable to the engine in Diablo 1, they could rebuild/reuse some assets for Tristram and properly align the distance and shape and size of the buildings easier. In Diablo 3 it looks like they crammed the town together in a very small area and moved on.

If you go to the spot in Diablo 1 where you first begin your journey, you'll be on the under side of the top right of the building located in the bottom right of Tristram. If you walk straight and around the building, you'll come out facing the well and Deckard Cain.

In Diablo 3, if you do the same thing, you come out in a totally different location and the buildings placement is entirely wrong. They did not attempt to properly scale or size the town and it is at best a crude representation of what Diablo 2's/1's Tristram was. It's clear they did not spend too much time making things screen accurate.

The Tristram in Diablo 2 was exactly the same as the Tristram in Diablo 1.

The Tristram in Diablo 3 is a lot different. Things are aligned differently and blocked off. There are additional wells added and buildings that weren't there before. The Cathedral is also a lot different.

The hole to Hell looks like some kind of a glitch... That red light coming up just looks odd. And that destroyed bridge where you used to cross over to see Wirt is -entirely- off.

Honestly, if you match up Diablo 1's Tristram with Diablo 3's they do not match by much at all.

Quote from FreddyBenson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nc_LIR5ExIU&feature=related

+10000. I was so bewildered by the OP, I had no idea what to post. There it is.

Quote from mbease

Quote from LordRayken

There is no "Stigma" about mac. Their computers are 1,000 dollars over priced for nothing more than a PC of the same quality. Pure and simple. That's all there is to it. You're paying for a name for no reason. "The MacBook air is the most 'beautiful' ..." Yeah, okay. Whatever that means when it comes to computing.

Not sure what kind of computer you built for 250, but it's not a nice one, and it's definitely not a gaming computer. A good mobo alone runs 100 dollars, a good processor is 100 more, a good graphics card is 150 more, case and power supply should run 90-100 more. A computer for 250 dollars is like, a gig of ram, an old mobo, a decent but old AMD processor, a horrible case/power supply and a hard-drive.

My Mobo and Processor together ran about 450 dollars.

You make Belial look like an innocent fibber.

All I'll allow myself to say toward such militant (seeming) PC ignorance is: nice limited warranty, embarrassing customer service, application/explorer crashes, humiliating battery life, and viruses, to name a few PC problems. You get for what you pay for.


The desktop I built did, indeed, cost me $250 total to build. I remember the 4GB RAM and the $20 case being on sale, and the video card, motherboard, and power supply were the most expensive parts (definitely didn't cost more than $80 for the video card, and the power supply was no more than $60). The computer wasn't a gaming beast, but it could play WoW on full graphics settings, which is what I cared about at the time. Spare monitor, keyboard, mouse, power cords. My friend bought it for the price I spent on it when I decided to move on to a laptop several months later.

You're a fairly ineffective Macintosh fanboy. Warranties are scams, customer service for what, exactly? And if you warrant paying over 1,000 dollars for a computer that doesn't have... "humiliating battery life" and "application crashes" ... Whatever the fuck that means, then be my guest. I haven't been running virus software on my Windows machines for years, so that goes to show you what browsing proper sites and knowing just -what- you're doing online comes into play when it comes to viruses.

As for the 250 dollar rig, I'm not sure still how you got something that price. I built a computer last february for 205 dollars and it has a tri-core AMD in it, a crappy mobo, no graphics card *just onboard* and 1 gig of ram with a 30 dollar case that included PSU. If I wanted to upgrade the RAM and add a graphics card, I'd need to upgrade the PSU *itd likely fail real quick* and I'd be spending over 100 bucks already with the addition of the graphics card and 3 more gigs of ram.

Quote from mbease

Quote from Siaynoq

My friend keeps telling me the same thing. He's always trying to get me to switch over to mac. The way I figured it, my desktop is a PC, so I'd like my laptop to be a Mac. So if I can get the air any time soon I totally will. I'm ready to start learning something new with it.

I agree. The whole stigma about Macs sucking is really inaccurate; I could never understand it.
The MacBook Air is the most beautiful laptop I've ever seen/used. PCs still have their uses, for sure (I have parallels with Win7 just in case), but they are most definitely not the only option (or best, in my opinion).


I really, really recommend building (or having a friend build you) a desktop for gaming.
The last computer I built was a desktop PC, all parts from NewEgg, and it was really great and really cheap. The whole thing costed $250, which got me 2.4-2.5 GHz (can't remember), 4 GB RAM, real nice NVIDIA video card (can't remember), and a 250 GB HD. Didn't have to pay for the OS, which greatly reduced the cost, too. That's a hell of a nice setup for being built 2 years ago on a $250 budget.

There is no "Stigma" about mac. Their computers are 1,000 dollars over priced for nothing more than a PC of the same quality. Pure and simple. That's all there is to it. You're paying for a name for no reason. "The MacBook air is the most 'beautiful' ..." Yeah, okay. Whatever that means when it comes to computing.

Not sure what kind of computer you built for 250, but it's not a nice one, and it's definitely not a gaming computer. A good mobo alone runs 100 dollars, a good processor is 100 more, a good graphics card is 150 more, case and power supply should run 90-100 more. A computer for 250 dollars is like, a gig of ram, an old mobo, a decent but old AMD processor, a horrible case/power supply and a hard-drive.

My Mobo and Processor together ran about 450 dollars.

Your first point is a good one,

Second is a good one,

Third one is just a glitch from Patch 13, I noticed even if I keep clicking to turn off tooltips and I log in and out it'll reactivate them.

The beta is a case of "I don't have it so I want it."

And, "Man if I had it I'd be totally different than you."

In reality it's nothing more than a closed demo. There is nothing to test and it's boring after you max out all 5 characters. You get to the limit of what you're able to do it in about 4 or 5 hours, and that's if you beat the game with all 5 classes and do a lot of crafting.

My favorite posters are the, "I SPEND OVER 10 HOURS A DAY WATCHING STREAMS, AND I'VE WRITTEN OVER 9,000 WIKI ARTICLES ON THIS GAME. I'D BE ON IT SOOO SOO LONG."

The problem with the rune system, the problem with the blah, the problem with the blah blah blah, "the real problem with the blah, blah, blah."

If there are so many PROBLEMS with Diablo 3, stop talking about it and leave. I am so sick and tired of people acting like they're game designers. You don't know anything about game design and you have no idea what you're talking about. Quit it.

Sounds pointless, really.

Quote from Kam

Act zero would be a break from the usual mayhem and demon slaughtering, and would help you appreciate the history behind your hero and what they do.

I'm sorry.

Did you say "a break from the usual mayhem and demon slaughtering" ....?

No the colors aren't fine, I prefer the filter.

This has nothing to do with Diablo 3, I don't even know why this topic is still open. It's very misleading.

What in the name of Diablo are you fucking talking about?

Who uses a basic attack, and for what purpose? When you're switching out skills? And even then, when won't you have another skill to use? Before level 4 or 5?

This is clearly a thread made just to get post count up. I've seen some of the most misinformed, uneducated people post things here in the last week than I ever have for a shot at a Beta Key.

Guys lets just all calm down.

One thing:

Switch the frames around, so the chats on the right, and the character stuff is on the left.

Why does it matter if you ran for your gear or bought it? It's a cooperative hack n slash. I will be of the opinion that people who buy gear are better off not playing video games, but honestly, who cares how they enjoy playing?