next »

[s0]

Does anyone else find it deeply ironic when someone says "I've played Diablo 3 for 200+ hours and it's the worst game ever"? Hell, I'd be thankful if I got fifty hours of entertainment out of a video game these days.

two explanations

1. you *enjoy* the game even though you realize it isn't good or you feel you're enjoying it for the "wrong" reasons. i had that with skyrim which was the game i played when i felt like playing videogames but didn't feel like thinking about or concentrating on anything for a while.

2. some games are fun while you're playing them but don't leave any positive lasting impressions, kinda like summer blockbusters. for instance uncharted was a game i had fun with but don't remember as being a particularly great or memorable experience.

[nekokoneko]

Diablo3 lures you along under the carrot on a stick idea, so when you get to the end and the carrot is rotten then well... you realise that its a bit of a joke.

Point is, they talked up Inferno to be something it wasn't, a lot of the people with substantial play time were hoping that it would be something great... so they spend 20+ hours getting there only to find out its shit (people can powerlevel in ~5hours). The journey to get there is where the majority of the time goes really and it feels artificial. I've tried to argue before that its not really until Hell/Inferno that the game inforces its own rules anyway so you could cut out Normal/Nightmare to lower the time put in for starters.

[Capntastic]

Point is, they talked up Inferno to be something it wasn't,

Yeah?

[Nillo]

They said Inferno was "really hard", and it turned out to be really hard. And then people complained, because it was totally really hard.

Edit: Here's a good article (and by "good" I mean that it agrees with me): http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/07/blizzard-admits-diablo-iii-is-a-game-that-ends/

[s0]

i guess the people complaining are wow players didn't play d2 and thought d3 was going to be an mmo or something. mmo players like games they can keep returning to for years.

[nekokoneko]

That article is pretty fucking stupid.

Can't be bothered to reiterate all the reasons why I think they dropped the ball, but one thing in that article really does annoy me;

"I'm sorry, but expecting a game to remain just as rewarding after playing for over 500 hours is a bit much. "

Makes me think its a person whos never found anything he truelly enjoys or has interest in.



- Oh and Diablo3 IS NOT Diablo3 until Hell onward. I mean this in the same way i'd say Frogger isn't Frogger if you dont die to the objects youre meant to dodge.

[Nillo]

"I'm sorry, but expecting a game to remain just as rewarding after playing for over 500 hours is a bit much. "

Makes me think its a person whos never found anything he truelly enjoys or has interest in.

How many games have you spent more than 500 hours on? I can count the games I've had that kind of interest in on one hand.

There's a big difference between "this is one of the greatest games I've ever played" and "this game is worth spending $60 on", and I would argue that Diablo 3 only needs to be the latter.

[nekokoneko]

I agree that there will be cases where a game doesnt need to have that kind of longevity but i was under the impression that something that touts randomly generated content to be something that is aiming striving for the long haul.

Given the development time i dont think peoples expectations were missplaced with wanting diablo3 to be something special, its hard to really argue a point like that though.

[s0]

Dude unless you play the game for like 10 hours a day,  500 hours IS the long haul. I don't think I've ever spent anywhere close to 500 hours on a single game.

[nekokoneko]

The student perspective

[Richard Kain]

I've clocked in at 30 hours for Diablo 3, and I've only played through it once on normal difficulty. As far as I'm concerned, my $60 were well spent. Personally, I preferred the single-player experience in StarCraft II. More strategic thinking, less skinner box. But I still found Diablo 3 to be a satisfying experience at 30 hours.

I once spent almost 100 hours trying to 100% Final Fantasy X. That is one of my longest, most extensive playthroughs. I can't even imagine trying to play a game for 500 hours. That's just crazy. Who has that kind of time these days?

[Blademasterbobo]

i'm a student. the only games i've spent close to that much time playing are competitive mp games.. . . .  . ..  ..

you have issues if you played diablo 3 for 500 hours

[Aloshi]

I've been playing Team Fortress 2 since November 25, 2007 and I've "only" played for 468 hours according to Steam.

[nekokoneko]

A better way to explain the way I view the time would be to say... you spend 30 hours traveling to disney land and when you get there most of the rides are closed, the weather is shit and what does work is mediocre.

What i'll say over and over is that diablo3 isnt diablo3 unless youre at least on hell... yet people want to use what is essentially travel time as part of their point when they really shouldnt.

What precedes it is fine, and people are welcome to enjoy that in the same way a road trip can be fucking awesome... the problem is that that others are also doing that because of the promise of the destination. I think its fine for people to be annoyed about the disappointing offerings at max level in diablo3, shame it takes such a tedious amount of time to find out just how bad it is at its core.

[Richard Kain]

What i'll say over and over is that diablo3 isnt diablo3 unless youre at least on hell... yet people want to use what is essentially travel time as part of their point when they really shouldnt.

I've never played Diablo 2, so I have no preconceptions about what the "core" Diablo experience is. I have no context for the kind of idealized experience you are describing. For me, playing through the game once on normal difficulty IS the entirety of my Diablo experience. Is there anything wrong if I'm satisfied with what was provided?

Someone who played Diablo 2 extensively would probably have different expectations for what Diablo 3 ought to be. But I can't help but feel that they are expecting a little too much.

[The Monster King]

What i'll say over and over is that diablo3 isnt diablo3 unless youre at least on hell... yet people want to use what is essentially travel time as part of their point when they really shouldnt.

are you saying that part of a game isnt the game

were you born this retarded or did someone drop you at one point in your life

fuck the stupid gamer mentality that you gotta work for some things hahahah

mmo players are the worst

i just paid 60$ for something and you tell me i still gotta put in a bunch of hours for the game to be good??


pretty sure they are also going to add a bunch of shit and then you nerds are gonna be all "omg you did a crit demon hunter in PVP WHAT A NOOB"

[Blademasterbobo]

basically, so far it seems like anyone who has a strong opinion about diablo 3 one way or the other is somewhat retarded

[Nillo]

I'm not even close to running out of things to do yet. I have two characters that are level 60, but neither of them have completed Inferno. I also want to have at least one character of each class, and I'm trying to collect every achievement, which means I'll have to make two of each class. I'll probably make half of them Hardcore characters and half normal ones.

[nekokoneko]

I'm saying that the game changes completely.

Diablo3 on normal/nightmare is a game where attack animations have little to no meaning.

The way i view game design in general is that the game only is what it enforces, you could say a game is about whatever the fuck you want, but unless its enforcing those rules by its own mechanics then its moot.

When the majority of environmental hazzards and spell effects are cosmetic its why i liken it to being like frogger without the elements killing you... it changes things.

Same way i'd look at WoW combat whereby the enemies seemingly lock onto you, no amount of running around them/through them changes the fact that they WILL hit you. Yet the moment you make it so that when they swing it can be dodged you start getting closer to TERA, its a little change but it impacts the gameplay and what the game is about.


In all honesty i wasnt trying to say that what precedes Hell difficulty is bad, its just a different thing.


Perhaps my perception of things is retarded and i never played diablo1/2.

[Capntastic]

My only stake in D3 so far is that it's fun to horse off in while drinking in Skype with friends.  Just like I've done with pretty much every multiplayer online game ever.