I totally agree with you. They say that the next two games are to be seen as expansion packs, at least in terms of what it will do to the multiplayer portion. …which kinda irks me, but whatever, hopefully it will work itself out and the final product will be badass as hell.
Also Jay Wilson said that they are looking to “monetize” some aspects of battle.net, which is 100% shitty. I don’t want to pay for it, but I probably will end up paying if that’s what it comes down to. Still awfully shitty though. I hope that does not fall through.
I’d rather risk playing with hackers than pay to play online, honestly. Hackers in Diablo are only a problem if you insist on not making an effort to not play with them and the starcraft community already has their own solution to hackers on bnet. AFAIC, there’s no reason to have bnet fees.
What?! The Campaign doesn’t make you better at playing a race. I’m sure all three races will be included from the first go. The next games will probably just be further campaigns and possibly small expansions to the unit/building count a la BW.
You might be right there, they did say that each game would be deep enough to justify an “Full, independent release.”
Sure.
Why does splitting up SC = associated costs with BNet? That seems nonsensical.
I think it comes from seeing how much money WoW makes them and they want to duplicate that not using an MMO. I kid. It’s an interesting idea at least and I’ll reserve my judgment until the game comes out. If the multi-player experience is a blast I’ll buy at least the first game regardless.
Yeah, starcraft is not WoW so they can’t and shouldn’t monetize bnet. There’s really no incentive in SC to continue to ‘level up’ like there is in WoW. If I see my ass getting kicking constantly, i’ll probably stick through with it for six months to try and get better. If the game isn’t fun and seems boring and i’m still not improving, then i’m going to put the game in the dust bin on the shelf. I wouldn’t gave a crap about the zerg or protoss campaigns btn.
In a way, this is going to be good for other pc gaming outfits. If they are smart, they will try to counter with a wonderful game. Why aren’t there other companies that can release a good rpg product in the style of diablo? Or companies that can make a damn good game that isn’t an FPS rehash???
My whole pc gaming life seems to revolve around fucking blizzard. I don’t like putting all my eggs in one basket.
If they Make Bnet pay to play they can kiss most of their OG players from D2 and SC goodbye. and Honestly, I have to say I’m not impressed with D3. Have you guys seen the graphics on it? They’re pathetic! They look like WoW! and don’t get me wrong it’s a great game in it’s aspects but I Personally Think WoW sucks! I think they could have done WAYYYYYYYY better on how D3 looks. But again, thats just my opinion. But regardless because it’s D3 I’m going to give it a chance,and I’m sure someone is going to neg me for saying this and I don’t care.
Yeah, well the better looking you make a game the more demanding the game is, which also results in fewer sales. I personally think the game looks fine, and it’s at least re-assuring that my PC might actually run it with decent settings/frame rate. I’m just going to assume that they are going the same route as WoW and make sure they can make the game as good looking as they can but still make it run on older PCs.
I understand what your saying there, but I didn’t mean make the game as demanding as Crysis or some shit. But I expected Blizzard to do better than WoW graphics. Or honestly I would have preferred the old D2 Graphics over the WoW Graphics.
First of all, Blizzard does this with every game. Fill the gap so low-end and high-end PCs get the same gameplay, different respective aesthetic. Have you even played WoW? D3 looks nothing like it. That’s just a typical response for people whining over the visual style of the game.
I remember on the initial impression people cried over the assumption the game wasn’t going to be dark enough. Over 18,000 dumbass people even signed an online petition to have it changed and Blizzard just laughed.
Just because you see a forest area doesn’t mean you’re going to spend the entire game in that scenario. Have people already forgotten D2? You’re in that environment, exploring caves, crypts, lairs along the way until you come to the end and you dungeon crawl. Why would D3 be any different?
I know that was irrelevant to what you were saying regarding the WoW style of graphics, but it was such a typical man-on-Internet response I just couldn’t help myself. Here’s a little comparison for you:
I would be completely OK if b.net had a monthly fee.
I play WoW and the fee is well worth it. Weekly patches means no duping, glitches and bugs get fixed quickly, botters and modders get banned, new content without having to buy expansions, etc etc.
If you think about it 15$ a month is dirt cheap compared to console gamers who pay 60 dollars a game, 30 dollars a controller, hundreds for systems and so on.
If WoW, D3, and SC2 each have their own separate monthly fee, THAT would be too much.
But look how crappy diablo 2 has gotten. There are videos on youtube explaining public dupe methods, bots are as easy to install as firefox plugins, and you can’t play in a public game for more than 30 seconds without being spammed by some website’s ad bot.
Just my opinion.
EDIT- in regards to the ‘darkness’ complaint about d3, change your gamma settings folks!
Seriously, as a WoW player, I’m not sure how in the hell Diablo 3 is anything like WoW. Why, because it doesn’t have bump mapping up the ass? Because it doesn’t strive for complete realism? Because it has some not-so-dark areas? I don’t get it. That forest stage was just that, a forest stage. Here I thought the Diablo community would be able to at least understand that. I actually WISH WoW had Diablo 3’s art style to be honest, since it’s much better in my opinion. My biggest concern is how the actual game will end up playing out. In light of the SC2 trilogy stupidity that Blizzard is doing I’m wondering if the same will apply to Diablo 3 somehow.
I agree with you, mags. I played on USWest back in 2000-2003, and I am (only slightly) ashamed to admit I was part of the group responsible for making and releasing occulus rings. The server was trashed, I used these rings as my own personal godlike currency to get my barb some even further broken gear like .08 valor, ith sword, elemental absorb helm, infinite teleport amulet. I was only able to do this because Blizzard didn’t have the same desire for security for bnet as they do for people who are paying monthly to NOT have jerks like teenage-me ruin the authenticity of the game.
Like a lot of people, I came back to the game after D3’s announcement, playing HC with a few of my buddies. We couldn’t even play safely in public games because the entire HC community were being habitually ganked by a hack. If duping, botting, spamming isn’t fixed, a full wipe aka ladder reset on the server is the best solution right? When the department isn’t getting paid, it sure is.
There was some dispute about D3’s bnet status, whether or not it was going to be p2p. The broke gamer in me wanted it to be free, but the realist in me thought how much of an amateur move it would be for Blizzard to harm their own cash cow. If you take into consideration the ~10 million subscriber’s that pay $15 a month to play a game(Don’t forget the people that pay for multiple accounts), basic arithmetic shows that is a shitload of money. I can’t speak for everyone, but when D3 is released, I have no reason to play WoW. So why give people the opportunity to not make those cunning bastard’s even more rich? C.R.E.A.M.
The SC2 Trilogy is Blizzard’s attempt to turn a single purchase retail game into a chance to triple the retail price. You know there’s a significant amount of people in the world that are going to jump on the chance to get all three at once(I’m looking at you, Korean gaming extremists!) but what about the more than casual gamer that loves RTS, he will obviously purchase his favorite faction, but what happens when he completes the game and instead of wanting human comp just wants to play alone some more… here comes purchase number 2 and the cycle is created until all three are his.
So until Blizzard definitively says Battle.net will or will not have monthly fees, it may be better to be pessimistic and just assume so, because if you hope… Blizzard just might lol,economy all over your wallet.
I’m so not cool with paying $15/month to play game online. Why? Because that’s $15 out of my pocket per month!!! I don’t want to play this crap for more than 6 months either, not play it online as much. My friends that I would play with definitely won’t subscribe to a monthly fee. Why? They are CASUAL games who froth at the mouth at the idea of paying a subscription to play a game they won’t be playing all the time.
$15 a month to play WoW is understandable since it’s so content rich, but i’d rather pay $5 for something like DIII.
I was this close to downloading D3 for 5 dolla, but I can’t do it. I just don’t want to light the pipe again. Good thing I got rid of the keys along with my CD’s.
The thing with D3 being 15$ is that they have to give a good reason for why it costs them to upkeep the server. WoW costs 15$ per month because it’s constantly being upgraded and maintained and there is a TON of stuff out there to keep track of and store. All of that costs money. For D3, the only thing I can think of that is like that is the storage cost of keeping every account created for a game that is going to draw so many people and the bandwith to support them on day 1. You know it’s going to be hugely successful, if not only from the success of WoW. I just can’t see them hosting that many people’s data on day 1 without paying through the nose for storage. It’s going to be huge and that’s the only legitimate reason for them pricing it at 15$ per month.
I kid. It’s an interesting idea at least and I’ll reserve my judgment until the game comes out. If the multi-player experience is a blast I’ll buy at least the first game regardless.
