Diablo® III

The Argument.. and why it doesn't fly

I still say that the devs will have to start hitting more home runs with every patch. If they fail to do that then this game will eventually die and it will be seen as a big flop.
Reply Quote
- D2 wasn't as good until LoD came out.
- D2 didn't have all the goodies when it came out, it took LoD for that
- Why should we expect D3 to have all it's goodies upon release if D2 didn't?

Let's flip the argument around and ask this question instead: Why did the D3 dev team literally go back 12 years and in essence, re-create D2 like it was released on day 1, with the exception of them removing PvP and the majority of the loot.

Yes D2 didn't have all it's goodies right away, but the fact of the matter is, all those little core goodies that made the diablo franchise great, were sitting there for them on a silver platter yelling "add me" "add me" "they love us".

So then you have to ask yourself this: Upon making D3, why did they remove the majority of the items, the runes, charms, jewels, rune words, horadric cube, an act, a class, the randomness, the PvP, the ladder, the social system, skill diversity, build diversity, the offline mode, chat rooms, 8 player max.

Why did they not just add these to D3, then start adding in all their creative ideas on top of it? There is absolutely no excuse as to why this dev team didn't add in all the core ingredients that were already part of the franchise.


Two words: Consoles and Accessibility
Reply Quote
12/07/2012 01:07 AMPosted by Deadlysynz
So then you have to ask yourself this: Upon making D3, why did they remove the majority of the items, the runes, charms, jewels, rune words, horadric cube, an act, a class, the randomness, the PvP, the ladder, the social system, skill diversity, build diversity, the offline mode, chat rooms, 8 player max.
Here's a list

Items - they weren't removed. They are still there. There's MORE ITEMS in D3 than there was in D2 at launch.

Runes - useless in the D3 environment. Extremely unbalancing, especially with runewords. The fact that sockets are limited and there are no white/grey socketed items should be a BIG HUGE CLUE there.

Jewels - these could have been implemented in a balanced manner. But few would likely use gems over jewels if it were the case. You might see them in the future.

Charms - these were not balanced. They were extra itemization thrown in. All they did was limit your inventory space, which for the most part, was under-used.

Horadric Cube - serves ZERO purpose. It was in beta for a time, it only worked as a remote salvage/shop. The recipes in D2 were for the most part, not used.

An Act/A Class - what are you talking about here? Different games are different. D1 to D2 had entire levels "removed" and classes changed as well. Why would you expect differently? Oh, that's right; you want Diablo 2.5. Look elsewhere.

The randomness - You complain about "random" when it's in your favor, and complain against "random" when it's not. "Levels aren't random!" "Items are TOO random!". I feel most people don't have an understanding of which they speak.

PvP - D2 didn't have PvP. It had "hostile mode". There was no PvP. No organization. No rules. No matching. Just "hostile". Stop calling it PvP; it's not.

Social System - D3 has as much social system as D2 has. "wug" "wuw" "wug" "wuw" - this wasn't social. Go make some friends in-game. You'll be surprised how receptive people are in public games. Oh, but that's right; public games are beneath you, aren't they?

Skill/Build diversity - Sorry, but D2 loses here as well. "Builds" consisted of getting some gear, planning your character to invest in JUST ENOUGH Str/Dex, ignoring Energy, and dumping everything into Vitality. Most "builds" didn't even function well without massive +skills items.

8-player Max - who cares? You don't want 8 people in your D3 game. 4 is enough. When is the last time you've seriously played with 4 people? Given your complain about "social system" in D3, my guess is next to never. You can't complain about something, then complain about it's opposite as well.

Ladder - this is the ONLY legitimate complaint about D3. Why is there no ladder? There should be one.

12/07/2012 08:03 AMPosted by CrniVuk
How people can defend a system like in D3 is something I dont understand.
...says the guy STILL PLAYING D3 ON A DAILY BASIS. Seriously, if you dislike it so much, MOVE ON TO ANOTHER GAME.
http://eu.battle.net/d3/en/profile/CrniVuk-2227/

12/07/2012 07:45 AMPosted by SixSixSix
It's amazing that players still can't get over the fact that this is a new game.
I leave my soap-box with this. ^
D3 is not D2.5.
D2 is not D1.5.

Different games are different. Like it or find something else.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
10175
It's amazing that players still can't get over the fact that this is a new game.

It's not a continuation of D2/LOD, and therefore should be looked upon as a different game.

If you don't like it, move on. Don't expect Blizzard to change this game around and go back in history to make it a D2 clone.

Personnally, I still play D2/LOD now and then - I have two different mods of that game installed - but overall, I like D3 very much and don't wish for any D2/LOD stuff to be imported into this game.


Its D2:LOD with less features , simpler interfaces and skill trees. Crappy loot drop rates based on a RMAH.

The fact that you still play D2/LOD shows exactly how good a game it is, can you see yourself playing D3 in 7-10 years? LOL.

Natural progression happened from D1-D2 but then god knows what happened with D3.
Reply Quote
I still see people saying that it took D2 years to get as good as it did, so why should we expect D3 to be as good upon release? I mean come on.. really?

If your going to make a sequel to franchise, or slap a name onto a video game that would imply it is a sequel... is it common practice to roll the game backwards?

Would it have not made sense for D3 to continue where D2 left off? If your going to essentially create a new game (as some of you have pointed out), why not just slap a new name on it? Throw a new end boss in the game, and name the game after that boss. Keep diablo in the game if you want, perhaps as an Act 1 boss.

It's my personal feeling that if you intend on making a sequel to something, at the very least, the franchise has to be followed and the things that made the franchise great, need to be included.

Yes D2 didn't have all the cool things upon launch, but they were there once it ended. There is no reason that D3 couldn't have started where D2 left off, if they wanted to keep the "diablo" name.
Edited by Deadlysynz#1583 on 12/14/2012 11:37 AM PST
Reply Quote
12/07/2012 07:45 AMPosted by SixSixSix
It's amazing that players still can't get over the fact that this is a new game.


Everyone is happy with it being a new game. Not everyone is happy about the regressive nature of it.
Reply Quote
12/14/2012 11:40 AMPosted by WideAsleep
Not everyone is happy about the regressive nature of it.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]