Diablo 3, but it is a good thing?

[C0RR0SIVE]

most PC games are online only now with DRM constantly checking

Most the ones that are online only are WoW like games, not games that should be somewhat capable of being played on high latency or low-bandwidth. 200MS was never a problem in D2, but with D3, everything being server side, and Activision being the *****s they wanna be, you can be you will have massive advertising, and a patch every week. Oh, also enjoy not having any save points at your discretion, only when the game wants to save will it save, oh, and have fun if the server goes down right in the middle of a boss battle when you WANT TO SOLO. They are pushing this as a multiplayer game, not a single player, well, most people that played Diablo and Diablo 2 played for the story, THEN the multiplayer. If Blizzard is as bad with D3 as they have been with SC2 (hey, they just released yet ANOTHER patch that crushed the game play on rigs with ATI card, imagine 10FPS on a $600 card that should be pushing 80FPS on ultra in that game easily) then I don't see why people will want to stay in the PC gaming market. Blizzard was the LAST company I looked to for great games, but WoW destroyed blizzard, just like I said back in beta for WoW, they can't get enough money, and the AH will give them a good chunk of that, and encourage item/gold farming overseas, and encourage people just buying w/e they want with a few bucks instead of actually earning it.

The game will never be balanced, just like SC2 balance was never correct, and never will be.

 

[Yami]

^ Sums up my issues with Blizzard and why I'm not buying DIII as a result.

 

[Sheepykins]

they're pitching it as a single game with online features, not a multiplayer game. yeah so you need to hook to the servers to play, you can still play alone, as you create the specific game.

and D2 didnt have savepoints, it was one of the first games that just saved as you went damn the consequences. And the multiplayer and single player were exactly the ****** same lol it was just you could have people play with you. it was glorified COOP.

and Blizzard have always kept up a continued standard of amazing games, books and etc. But at the end of the day Corrosive, they're trying to run a business. It'd be nice to go all communist and have the devs swap their coding skills for shiny beads and fresh bread but it isnt going to happen, which is why they jumped at merging with Vivendi (the parent company alongside activision who merged with them) because they couldnt run a company for ****.

Why do people have to be so morally righteous about games, just accept things for the way they are - this wouldnt be happening if people didnt pirate stuff, but they do. businesses are trying to protect their interests by using the internet and i stand behind it.

and yeah, they'll patch it. and have maintenance days, and try to make more money which probably isnt the devs idea and will either detract or add to the gameplay but then, thats added value which for this game - you're getting for free.

Would you rather they release a game and then never do anything with it again? people like you guys would moan either way. SHUT UP, buy the game and enjoy it and if you dont like that, then lets take it to the Arena!

I'll be displaying your ear before nightfall

 

[Yami]

It's not about moral righteousness. It's basic capitalism - their games aren't what I want to buy, so I'm not buying them.

 

[Sheepykins]

incase you wernt following for the last, how many years of your life? the world runs on capitalism. its a fact of life, so why show your public outrage by hitting back at a games company who are providing a product to help people feel good?

 

[Yami]

I'm not understanding your logic there. I'm not getting how
"incase you wernt following for the last, how many years of your life? the world runs on capitalism. its a fact of life,"
leads into
"so why show your public outrage by hitting back at a games company who are providing a product to help people feel good?"

I mean, there's not any connection between those in the slightest. I can't even respond because your whole post completely lacks meaning.

 

[Sheepykins]

eh.. .you know what forget it. Buy the game, dont buy the game. it means nothing to me.

but if you have a problem with capitalism within the gaming industry, then i sense a bleak gameless future for you.

 

[Yami]

But... I don't have a problem with capitalism in the gaming industry. I don't know where you got that from. Which is probably why your previous post left me confused.

 

[Sheepykins]

I said people get morally righteous about games companies adding all these little extra tidbits for cash and then lose faith in games companies like corrosive. you said it was just capitalism, which is true

yet you said you agreed with corrosive, therefore you dislike the companies capitalist agenda no?

It's not about moral righteousness. It's basic capitalism

though to be fair, you didnt really make it clear on what you agreed with. Blizzards lack of game balancing and utter F-up of the games they monitor, or all the little added stuff they try and make you pay.

I assumed the latter when you mentioned capitalism

 

[Yami]

Ah right, now I getcha XD Sorry about the confusion, it stemmed from me not specifying what I agreed on with Corrosive.

When I said "It's basic capitalism', I meant my choosing not to buy it (i.e. voting with my wallet).

Mind if I ask for these few posts to be deleted? They add nothing to the convo