Issues with diablo 3... - Page 7
Forum Index > Diablo 3 |
akalarry
United States1978 Posts
| ||
Burrfoot
United States1176 Posts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/07/12/diablo-3-needs-an-endgame-and-fast/ | ||
Medrea
10003 Posts
A lot of it is "invested gaming" where you figure the game is going to improve down the line to the point where it becomes an excellent game. I think thats where a lot of the current RMAH economy is being driven from but its not sustainable in any shape or form. Blizzard only has a couple of patches before this game goes down as the worst Blizzard game in history (which honestly isn't too bad). | ||
crms
United States11933 Posts
| ||
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
| ||
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
Medrea
10003 Posts
Exactly. Even though Blizzards attitude towards PvP is piss poor, a lot of people are gonna throw a lot of money at it. I have a full suite of excellent PvP gear with control reductions. You want it now? Cuz it would only be like 20 bucks a piece, too bad, pay me $250 later. Throw dat money at me. I need more 7970's two just won't do. D3 has to pay for my 6 monitor eyefinity setup and Im almost there! | ||
n0ave
180 Posts
On July 11 2012 11:17 Mr.Bimbles wrote: Spent thousands of Euros on a Brand New State of the Art Gaming PC, Panasonic Viera Flatscreen HD TV, Expensive Desk and Leather Directors Chair, 100 Euro Keyboard, Steel Series Diablo Mouse and Mouse Pad, Expensive Speakers, Sound and Bass unit, And a Expensive new PC Desk.. Not to Mention the game itself. All of this equipment not sits idle and does not get used. I just use my old PC it is only a DuoCore but its enough for I need, check emails, browse webpages, visit my gambling websites, Check sports results. And stream BBC iplayer and some cartoons like Family Guy and Ameircan Dad.. I've spent all this money and not even using the PC.... No hard feeling but you have some real issues, it's you to be blamed, not the game. Diablo 3 is a decent game, don't over play it or it will backfire on your real life and you'll end up uninstalling it. You should sell everything that you bought since you don't actually use them, along with everything from your d3 account, and take that trip that you dream about. Again it's you to be blamed for making such a big investment only to play a game. | ||
Medrea
10003 Posts
| ||
andrewlt
United States7645 Posts
Not sure whether this or your post on the website feedback thread is a better thread to say this, but your writing style is not effective. What you are doing is just dumping all your thoughts on to a thread. There is no organization, no flow, no transitions between points and no effort to be concise. Some of the reasons Monk wrote for closing your SC2 thread could be applied here. Kitchen sink arguments aren't good arguments at all. Adding too many weak points to inflate your word count doesn't make the argument stronger. It makes it far weaker. Like Barrin, I just skimmed over most of the points. I found more that I disagreed with than ones I agreed with. You claimed to have spent 500 hours playing D3. People aren't going to spend that much time playing a game before deciding whether they like it or not. The same goes for posts. I started reading your first points, disagreed with almost all of the first ten or so then just skimmed the rest. There are far more weaker points than strong points. The strong points are lost amidst all the rubble. | ||
[]Phase[]
Belgium927 Posts
On July 13 2012 03:07 n0ave wrote: No hard feeling but you have some real issues, it's you to be blamed, not the game. Diablo 3 is a decent game, don't over play it or it will backfire on your real life and you'll end up uninstalling it. You should sell everything that you bought since you don't actually use them, along with everything from your d3 account, and take that trip that you dream about. Again it's you to be blamed for making such a big investment only to play a game. Thought the exact same thing. Way to go investing in so much when you seem like someone who doesnt play alot of games. | ||
WGT-Baal
France3155 Posts
| ||
MrTortoise
1388 Posts
On July 12 2012 03:33 ZasZ. wrote: Agreed that truly great games can occupy you for hundreds of hours, but 80 hours of entertainment from a $60 investment is in no way a ripoff. I'm not sure where you live that you have to save for an entire year to purchase one game, but for me even a couple weeks of entertainment is enough to get my money's worth out of a game. Do I wish they all provided 500 hours of gameplay? Well no...I don't have that much time to play video games. Do I wish they provided more than we currently get? Of course, but the game industry is obviously trending towards the CoD model of releasing games. I'm not sure why it took them so long to catch on to it, EA has been doing it with Madden for years. The year comment was when i was a 14yo kid saving for a £40 megadrive game. Now I don't think twice about spending cash on a game - but that doesnt mean my expectations have dropped. Quite the opposite things have had 17 years to develop yet haven't ... if anything they arn't developers more stagnaters. Unless you count improved graphics as real significant development ... Interesting you mentioned madden, i did spend a long time playing the first madden game i ever had ... i think it was madden 94 or something on the megadrive ... and i bet everyone has sunk a decent amount of time into one incarnation or another ... the point is that that is a serial release that gradually builds. D3 went backwards. as for do i wish they all provided 500 hours entertainment ... well yes, that doesn't mean you have to sink that time but a game should make you want to go back and play it, I am really bored of d3 already after 80 hours. TBH I was bored of it half way through act 2. Thankgod for zoltan kule (Ever notice hes the only guy with charisma? Also notice hes the only guy that doesn't really have any direct interaction via dialogue system?). ACt3 was interesting because of the set pieces and the feeling of rapid pace. Act 4 just didnt do it for me at all and diablo was stupidly easy - i think i killed him first time. Now in d2 i remember diablo actually being hard, i remember dreading dying on act4 as reclaiming my corpse was/could be hard. Anyway different game. As for playing the game through another 2 times ... i did that because of the promise of inferno being some new kind of awesome. But no ... that is not the case. so really of the 80 hours i sunk 50 of them are really just grind to get to the promised land that is a lie. Sure i might play the game again when pvp comes out ... but its too late pvp would of been an interesting break to grinding through the game. Now its after and i really cba. Tbh i bet i never ever get around to playing it. TBH im hoping i get a cs:go key and fall in love with it. I might go and check out the torchlight 2 beta failing that tbh. | ||
Sufinsil
United States760 Posts
Honestly, there is this minority of elite gamers that want to devour content so fast and be the biggest baddest. Then complain when they are bored of it. And it reads "Why isn't this D2 with pretty graphics?". They made the game to appeal to the masses, Think I have 100 hours into it, no lv 60 yet. Other than act 2, great fun. Had a lot going on the past 2 weeks, expect to get Inferno soon. | ||
InMotion
Canada110 Posts
| ||
Dfgj
Singapore5922 Posts
On July 13 2012 05:59 Sufinsil wrote: They made the game to appeal to the masses, So why are so few people in public games? | ||
YODA_
593 Posts
Because playing with people you don't know is a complete crap-shoot and 99% of the time they will just make the game harder for no noticeable benefit. | ||
sfdrew
United States201 Posts
I agree with a lot of his points, but he is either lying about some things, or is really bad at estimating numbers. I doubt more than a few people have 500 hours logged, even to this day, and that would require them playing it like a full-time job, plus some, everyday since launch. | ||
Dfgj
Singapore5922 Posts
On July 13 2012 08:22 sfdrew wrote: Let's say you played the game 20 hours a day. It would take 40 days, or almost a month and a half to accumulate 500 hours. Saying it did in a week is BS! Especially since a week only contains 168 hours. He never said he had 500 hours played in a week. | ||
sfdrew
United States201 Posts
On July 13 2012 08:24 Dfgj wrote: He never said he had 500 hours played in a week. I think this is the part most people were picking up on. + Show Spoiler + Within a week I got bored. Now 500+ hours of playing this game, I guess he got bored after a week but still continued to play for hundreds of hours. I can't explain that. I stop doing things when they get boring. | ||
| ||