Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by Dalano

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by Siveria

Guess the fanboys relised the game is nothing like diablo 2, and shouldn't even really be called Diablo at all. Took them long enough imo.

 They said the same thing about Diablo 2 being nothing like Diablo 1.  Of course all three of them having Diablo as the main focus may have something to do with the name.

All I know is this oO

D2 - 8.5 out of 236 ratings.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-ii

D3 - 3.6 out of 2198 ratings.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii

 

 

 And how long after D2's release did metacritic actually launch their site? See I remember the D2 launch. I was in line the moment it went on sale. I remember the invalid CD keys, overcrowding, and hundreds of bad installation disks. I bet none of that was mentioned on metacritic.

Metacritic launched Jan, 2001.

D2 launched June 2000 for PC and July 2000 for Mac.

So you are right.........

D2: Lord of Destruction Launched June 2001 - 9.0 out of 173 ratings.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-ii-lord-of-destruction

Same excuse or are we going with a new one this time?

 

 

In 2001, Blizzard was viewed by a good number of gamers as one of the top development studios in the biz. Now that they've been on top for so long they draw the hipster hate. 

Yep, has nothing to do with anything they've done....... it's just hipsters hating on Blizzard.

So far people have LOVED Real ID and Online Only Single player games. It's not because quality and content has been slipping in favor of maximizing profits. These things have been universally well recieved. Those complaining don't really dislike Diablo 3 or the server issues, they don't really dislike the gameplay or the art and graphics. They don't dislike the story or having to rerun levels over and over.

 

It's just hipsters hating on Blizzard for being number 1.

 People complained about RealID and single player online games. They still lined up to help Blizzard set new sales records and they're doing it again. I'm going with actions speak louder than words.  

Originally posted by citalkay

Why is a non MMO game on "MMORPG.com"?

 Because it's popular and topical. The website covers more than MMORPGs

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by Siveria

Guess the fanboys relised the game is nothing like diablo 2, and shouldn't even really be called Diablo at all. Took them long enough imo.

 They said the same thing about Diablo 2 being nothing like Diablo 1.  Of course all three of them having Diablo as the main focus may have something to do with the name.

All I know is this oO

D2 - 8.5 out of 236 ratings.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-ii

D3 - 3.6 out of 2198 ratings.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii

 

 

 And how long after D2's release did metacritic actually launch their site? See I remember the D2 launch. I was in line the moment it went on sale. I remember the invalid CD keys, overcrowding, and hundreds of bad installation disks. I bet none of that was mentioned on metacritic.

Metacritic launched Jan, 2001.

D2 launched June 2000 for PC and July 2000 for Mac.

So you are right.........

D2: Lord of Destruction Launched June 2001 - 9.0 out of 173 ratings.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-ii-lord-of-destruction

Same excuse or are we going with a new one this time?

 

 

 No the LoD launch was pretty flawless.Other than the few complaints about the new rune systems.  It was cracked for CD copying on launch day. How many people knew what Metacritic was in 2001? That's a pretty small sample for an expansion that sold a million copies the first week. 

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by slickbizzle

Everyone knows metacritic user reviews are crap. Unless they slam games in competition with Blizzard, in which case  they are dead-on and reliable.

 

 

 No they're pretty much all crap. Blizzaerd just gets more hate because it's he cool thing to do. Sometimes they even deserve it.

Lets be fair here, there is a difference between Blizzard and Activision Blizzard. Activision Blizzard gets more hate, but sadly it's usually because of moves like this. They have been notorious with their blunders after the aquasition. Things like Real ID and Online Only single player games can give a company a real bad rep in a hurry. 

 To be fair Blizzard Pre-WoW was not the same as Blizzard post WoW.  Long before Activision. On the other hand I know the history of why they went with nearly online only, and then online only, single player games. It had a lot to do with what happened to  Diablo 2 and Warcraft 3. It's the actions of players and the over-reactions of Blizzard. The Facebook, Twitter, etc.  craze played it's part too. The Battlenet they're trying to build  is rather grandiose.

Originally posted by GrayGhost79

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by Siveria

Guess the fanboys relised the game is nothing like diablo 2, and shouldn't even really be called Diablo at all. Took them long enough imo.

 They said the same thing about Diablo 2 being nothing like Diablo 1.  Of course all three of them having Diablo as the main focus may have something to do with the name.

All I know is this oO

D2 - 8.5 out of 236 ratings.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-ii

D3 - 3.6 out of 2198 ratings.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii

 

 

 And how long after D2's release did metacritic actually launch their site? See I remember the D2 launch. I was in line the moment it went on sale. I remember the invalid CD keys, overcrowding, and hundreds of bad installation disks. I bet none of that was mentioned on metacritic.

Originally posted by slickbizzle

Everyone knows metacritic user reviews are crap. Unless they slam games in competition with Blizzard, in which case  they are dead-on and reliable.

 

 

 No they're pretty much all crap. Blizzaerd just gets more hate because it's he cool thing to do. Sometimes they even deserve it.

Originally posted by Siveria

Guess the fanboys relised the game is nothing like diablo 2, and shouldn't even really be called Diablo at all. Took them long enough imo.

 They said the same thing about Diablo 2 being nothing like Diablo 1.  Of course all three of them having Diablo as the main focus may have something to do with the name.

Originally posted by TurkeyBurger

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by Golelorn

 Not a personal attack. A cogent observation. People who spout disproven conspiracy theories are rarely able to tell the difference between BS and legitmate complaints.

Ah, right, because review sites don't recieve advertising dollars from game companies. 

Totally got that wrong, didn't I?

 Advertising dollars do not buy integrity. Either a site has it or it does not.  There is a vested interest in being honest. In fact since website traffic drives advertising revenue the tendency it so bend over backwards for the audience you're trying to reach. Unless there's some form of direct payment I'm not aware of the assertion is absurd on it's face.

Strange that less than two inches beneath your post is a gigantic moving advertisement for none other than, drum roll, brace for epic DIABLO 3!

I wonder how much revenue that ad generates. Per click? Just for hosting the advertisement? You want ding dong banu? Professionaly paid gaming revues are worth the check they are written on. I trust the gamers and actual consumers far more than paid bought corporate shills.

 So MMORPG.COM are paid  bought corporate shills? You're seriously going to stand by that?

Originally posted by rexzshadow

Originally posted by Jyiiga

Some of the Korean players are already lvl 60 and in Inferno mode. I believe they have even downed King Leoric in Inferno mode.

Blizzard actually stated that Inferno would be so hard that it would not be completed for months.

Looks like that may be BS.

Blizzard doesn't know Koreans lol

 Seriously. Some of these people (not just Koreans) are the next step on the evolutionary scale. It's frightening.

Originally posted by Golelorn

 Not a personal attack. A cogent observation. People who spout disproven conspiracy theories are rarely able to tell the difference between BS and legitmate complaints.

Ah, right, because review sites don't recieve advertising dollars from game companies. 

Totally got that wrong, didn't I?

 Advertising dollars do not buy integrity. Either a site has it or it does not.  There is a vested interest in being honest. In fact since website traffic drives advertising revenue the tendency it so bend over backwards for the audience you're trying to reach. Unless there's some form of direct payment I'm not aware of the assertion is absurd on it's face.

Originally posted by Golelorn

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by Golelorn

Originally posted by Anolev

Originally posted by Golelorn

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Metacritic is useless. 

No, its not.

Yes, it is.

Play the games/demos yourselves and draw your own opinions... or do you always let others tell you what your opinons are for you? 

Nope. I find some opinions to be useful, and some not to be useful.

 

That's why you gotta read some of the reviews. An intelligent person can tell BS from legitimate complaints.

 

I find metacritic way more useful than MMORPG, Gamespot.com and other so-called professional reviews. One is paid for and bought, the other isn't.

 It's useless for the reason I said it's useless. It's easily manipulated.

 An intelligent person can tell BS from legitimate complaints.

One is paid for and bought, the other isn't.

You just excluded yourself.

 

Nice. Resort to personal attacks when you're out of ammo. Never fails.

 Not a personal attack. A cogent observation. People who spout disproven conspiracy theories are rarely able to tell the difference between BS and legitmate complaints.

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client.   You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc. 

 

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that. 

 You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators?  If so you have grasped it completely.

It makes it easier to build server emulators. It does not make it easier to hack their servers or dupe items on their servers. If you understand that, you have grasped it completely.

You're still wrong. Unless they create a completely different set of processes for the single player game it will give insight into processes running on the servers themselves. Never a good thing. I'm still waiting for you to provide any refutation of the point beyond nuh-uh.

Originally posted by TurkeyBurger

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Metacritic is useless. It's been gamed so many times in so many ways it's even worse than the hype ratings here.

I think this review is hardly "useless" as you so state. Let's actually do some leg work and, oh I don't know READ what the people are complaining about SHALL WE?

Page one, very first review

- Charater customization was so confusing, so they removed it (no more skill points to distribute, no more attribute points to distribute, skills unlock automatically as you level up)

- Legalized gold selling, pay-to-win auction houses

- Scripted scenes EVERYWHERE 0Bland,

-one dimensional

-WoW inspired skills

-World PvP removed and the only PvP options is a WoW-clone arena (REMOVED TILL LATER, LOL)

-Voice acting is HORIBBLE compared to D2

-Timed log-outs in a game which its gameplay is based on being fast-paced (even on hardcore mode)

-FREQUENT CHECKPOINTS that revive you from where you are left off (how much more casual can they make a diablo game I wonder)

-region lock

-DRM that requires you to be constanly online

-blizzard 'promising' not to put any items in the RMAH Gee, I **** wonder what's gonna happen

-LEVEL 60 CAP Surely to be raised to 70,80,90 and so on with yearly expansions that consists of cut content for only another $60!

-reviewer by the name of koroshiya_ichi

It is hard to argue with many of the points this person made. Care to revise your statement there zym? Or are you too busy stuffing your mouth with Blizz Diablow three turds to read?

 

 

 Why would I care what they have to say? Do you base your purchase decisions on what random anonymous internet people say? I looked at the game. I didn't buy it. None of those is the reason I didn't buy it.

Metacritic is useless. It's been gamed so many times in so many ways it's even worse than the hype ratings here.

Originally posted by adam_nox

uh, in D2, characters and gear were stored online, as well as some other data was passed back and forth, while the servers generally 'trusted' your client.   You could still get lagged out, stuck in place, disconnected, etc. 

 

Anyways, besides making it easier to find vulnerabilities in the server code, providing an offline mode would just give the game to a bunch of freeloaders who don't want to pay for it, so screw that. 

 You mean through an increased understanding making it easier to build server emulators?  If so you have grasped it completely.

[mod edit]

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by expresso

Why didn't they have an option for offline play but not let those toons online?

 

To achieve this Blizzard would have to run a mini version of their server on the client machine, this will open up the security and techniques used in the online version and hacks will be so much easier to develope and test.

 

 

[mod edit]

 

Yes, the client would have to have gear/characters exist locally in order to support a solid single player experience, but obviously this doesn't increase how easy it is to create a hack in order to change your equipement on their server.

[mod edit]

 Giving access to code, any code, gives insight into server processes. Diablo has had more than it's share of hacks in the past. So no it's not stupid bullshit. The things you dismiss as obviously untrue aren't. There are exploits other than changing the equipment on the server. This is really just a logical extension of the policy of not telling the client anything it doesn't need to know.

Originally posted by salenger

Originally posted by Kost

Originally posted by salenger

I think this probably goes down as one of the worst release ive ever taken part in,

Compared to what?

No seriously, I'd love to hear what other mmo or co-rpg releases you've taken part in where a measly few hours of downtime was considered something worth complaining about.

Instead of just making baseless claims, back it up with data and proof.

Oh were supposed to go into Forum war mode now, because i said that D3 has a very poor release for a non MMOrpg game?  

There has been hundreds on big budget games without the small problems that have plagued release day 1 for D3, i suggest you look them up seeing as your so interested.  

I for one am not in the mood to argue over something pointless, btw did i hurt your but?

 Maybe but it's kind of like arguing the Saturn V had a lot of small problems that didn't plauge the Redstone . If you want to compare it to something compare it to Starcraft 2. Yup same type of problems. So it's frustrating and unfortunate. It's not something to get fuzzed about. I hope your day gets better.

It's one of the better games out there. I just couldn't see a goal worth pursuing over the long term. It's worth a look for anyone though.

Originally posted by dubyahite

Originally posted by Istavaan

Originally posted by expresso

Originally posted by Istavaan

if diablo 3 has a forum here then so should call of duty and battlefield, or maybe just maybe blizzard paid to get diablo 3 a spot on this site.

So we should remove Guildwars 1 also then?

guild wars has a centralized hub where hundreds of people gather, i think that qualifies it as an mmo. diablo 3 is a hack and slash rpg with multiplayer options. don't get it twisted.

Oh well then that settles it. Thousands of people will gather in the lobby of D3. I guess it's an mmo by your definition.

 By that definition Diablo 1 was a MMO. So was almost every online game. I'm all for being inclusive but that's just silly.