Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
It's kind of telling for me that no one seems to have anything positive to say about this, neither the THN MMO crowd or the THN non MMO bunch.
Diablo 3 open beta weekend (20th - 22nd)
- Thread starter Haven
- Start date
Well, I'm going to buck the trend... I liked it. I'm already gettting it since I had it for a christmas present so I WILL LIKE IT 
I think the beta gave a taster for it, but the final game I feel will be a lot more than what we saw. It's like saying you played 1-10 in WOW and didn't feel it was a challenge.
I think the beta gave a taster for it, but the final game I feel will be a lot more than what we saw. It's like saying you played 1-10 in WOW and didn't feel it was a challenge.
Ki!ler-Mk1
Active Member
That isn't new, SC2 and world of warcraft are both always on.
Also, you CAN pause the game if you are alone.
Well, I'm going to buck the trend... I liked it. I'm already gettting it since I had it for a christmas present so I WILL LIKE IT
Hah, I pre ordered it April 12 2010
Overal, i did not like the beta, and i sincerely hope that the full game becomes challenging before the end of normal difficulty.
I think they are taking a similar approach to what they have done in WOW. Hell and Nightmare mode are where the challenges are going to be. By the sounds of it you will die in those modes.
Still can't get my head around this one myself.....
There is more than one mode in the game. The more difficult ones will be harder to do and therefore not casual.
So therefore this should be a challenge.
But like in WOW doing the same thing but harder isn't seem as a challenge but just a grind.
You would of thought this would be the best of both worlds.... but it just dosen't work.
Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
What are we calling a casual gamer now?
I wouldn't exactly describe myself as hardcore, but I played D1 and 2. It was never what I would describe as a hardcore game, it was a clickfest with a few light RPG elements and an interesting treasure and item system and procedural generation, the basic game mechanics were so easy even my sister played it for about an hour and wasn't rubbish, before deciding it wasn't worth her time.
Surely the term casual gaming should be reserved for farmville, social media games in general and things like launching birds at pigs?
Death to Anti-Pig Bird Launcher!
Nah, I don't think they've made D3 casual any more than the originals. I don't even mind that it was easy (after all, you're a hero, no?). I just didn't like D2 enough to think that buying it again for D3, just prettier, is worth my monies. I'd rather pick up a few copies of Insanely Twisted Shadow Planet and see how that plays coop, actually.
Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
That does look awesome, but a very different style of game.
Ki!ler-Mk1
Active Member
A grind because we are forced to play through normal first.
That said, i never felt it was a grind playing the end of D2's Hell difficulty over and over, in part because it was very hard, not the same kind as hard as endgame raiding, as you didnt have to rely on others, even when playing games with the difficulty ranked up to +8.
My favourite brand of hack and slash difficulty is the one where the enemies had proportionately (proportionate to the easier difficulties.) more damage dealing ability and special abilities but not such a health hike.
Ki!ler-Mk1
Active Member
http://www.diablofans.com/news/1172...tomization-loot-mooching-graphics-blue-posts/
These blue posts are very educational, and have turned my sourness.
These blue posts are very educational, and have turned my sourness.
thatbloke
Junior Administrator
From that:
This right here is precisely the reason why I think i've started to dislike the way a lot of MMOs or games where you have a "level" based system for progression are going. Not actually because of the game itself, but because of the attitude of a significant number of the playerbase.
For some reason, the idea of "having fun" and being able to play a game the way you want to when getting from the minimum level to the maximum level (and then the "end game" when you are at the max level) is now anathema to a significant amount of the playerbase for a lot of these games. It's all about getting to the maximum level in the fastest way possible, and once there, using whatever someone else has figured out as "the best" instead of actually playing the game, enjoying it, and attempting to figure things out for yourself.
People expect there to be "a right way" of doing things, and even the smallest deviation from that "right way" means you have no idea what you are talking about and you cannot play the game at all because you suck.
...Back on topic, those posts mean I will reserve judgement about D3 till probably a couple of months after its release, but I'm certainly not going to be buying it on release day.
Panda with issues...
Well-Known Member
This is essentially an example of 'Netdecking'. Netdecking is a plague that afflicts all sorts of games of all sorts of types, and will never go away. It's originally a term from MtG, and basically describes people that are too stupid, lazy or boring to do anything themselves, so they just look up the most efficient power builds at the moment and just aim for that rather than try to work anything out on their own, or make a decision for themselves.
It leads to boring games, where everyone is using the same units/guns/cards/armies/strategies.
Netdecking is driven by a number of things:
- Lazy and boring players, who are typically ultra competitive. It is important to note that not all ultra competitive players are net deckers (in fact, many of the best players of games spend the time to work things out themselves, rather than leap in and wallow in consensus opinion, and indeed, experience makes them better players).
- The need for other competitive players to feel admired for their skill, so they constantly post lists/equipment choices (I'd generally regard this as the lesser of all these factors, but the fact is, netdecking could be cut down or eliminated if players, especially top competitive players just stopped posting lists and told people to grow up and work it out for themselves.
- Poor game design and playtesting. If one 'build' (whatever game you're playing) is significantly better than anything else, then you've failed at your attempts at game balance, unless...you weren't aiming to balance your game at all, which says something to the quality of the game.
Games don't need to be balanced to be fun, indeed, many games are fun because they're NOT balanced - Examples might include things like munchkin, which many people enjoy significantly.
However, some people get their fun from competitiveness, which is fine, (though I'd argue if you're aiming to get more fun from WINNING the game than the process of PLAYING the game, then there's some sort of problem with how you are choosing to spend your time).
What I would argue is that if you want to have fun by playing a competitive game at a high level, the game you should play should be as balanced as possible. - Examples like chess are strong here, games like Warhammer 40k are pretty atrocious, with notoriously poorly constructed and thought out rules.
Anyone who wants to play anything competitively should read Sirlin's book http://www.sirlin.net/ptw/ (free online), which gives great insight into the mind of a competitive gamer, a man who once won a street fighter tournament match by using the same move over and over again whilst standing still for ages (for many of us, anathematically boring). His opinions are not necessarily ones I share, but are fine for anyone that thinks in the same way he does, and a lot of his analysis is spot on regarding mindsets and game balance requirements, especially for ultracompetitive environments.
He generally makes dismissive and slightly derogatory comments about people who choose to play games in a different way than he does. - It's his book, and it's only about ONE way to play games as he articulates, but I do think his biases show through quite strongly. People naturally have biases though, I'm probably equally biased towards fun play.
The problem becomes when people have very different opinions on how they extract their fun from the game. The best way to avoid conflict is to avoid people and events etc that you know you will encounter people who play the game for vastly different reasons for you. Unfortunately, the internet often puts players together with these different opinions, without either side knowing prior, what the other players want out of the game. Examples would be the noob hate in games like DOTA and LoL, and fluffy vs hard lists in tabletop wargames, as well as what bloke articulated above.
Ultimately though, my opinion is that NO ONE, neither ultra competitive players, nor fun players benefit in any way from net decking, and net deckers and their ilk are the scum at the bottom of the barrel for any game. If you want to play hard, learn to optimise whatever it is yourself, don't just become a parasite and leach other people's ideas. Stifled creativity is never a good thing, especially if creativity is one of the reasons some people play the game.
Ki!ler-Mk1
Active Member
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/3811455085?page=1
From the blues I linked earlier.
Read it all. Awesome.
EDIT:
From the blues I linked earlier.
Read it all. Awesome.
EDIT: