Rating of this game i hope is going to be 5 or less

#1 Posted by johnlewis656 (10 posts) -
I honestly hope the guy or gal from gamespot rating this game is not on blizz payroll nor were bribed with boxed editions & stuff and flames it rightfully for all its mistakes and connection issues all that. The only good thing about the game is the cinematics everything else feels rushed & unbalanced if thats the right word for it. If people have something bad to say about this post go have a look at the games forum itself then you will see i aint the only one that feels this way. Another thing its really linear and most maps in the start is not even a quater the size of ex titan quest maps if i had to suck i figure out of my thumb anyways please for the love of god give it its due review and do mention all the negatives
#2 Posted by Shiftfallout (2635 posts) -
Well considering Blizzard's cinematics department is larger than Pixar's, I am not surprised. I agree with you though. Diablo 3 is a horrible sub par product that really isnt up to Blizzard quality. The art is good, the hand painted textures are good, great soundtrack...thats where the good really ends. When I received the Collectors Edition of the game, I was surprised to find out that the game disk was empty....well except for a 1mb installer which downloads the game from the internet. IN that case whats the point of the disk? I had to wait for the game to download from the internet just so I could play on launchday with the the game disc in hand. What the hell where they thinking?! When in game, the cut scenes didnt play smoothly, in fact they were barely watchable since it felt like it was streaming from a blizzard server. Disconnects for what felt like a single player game were many, sometimes the character would just stop responding altogether. The AH was broken and when it works you realize the design of it breaks the game. The itemization is a bit of a joke, not very well designed. Theres no reason to craft in the game, not sure why they put it in there. IT cost too much to craft a sub par item which can usually be found for cheaper on the AH or in a world drop...which were many by the way. Rares are not rare, legendary is often worse than an uncommon drop and the whole flow of the game is just sloppy.
#4 Posted by hmmblabla (788 posts) -

There are definitely some issues that need to be addressed but the cinematics were smooth for me. Also Diablo 2 (have not had the pleasure of playing the first Diablo yet) was pretty linear, so it's not surprising that the story is linear in this game either. Overall I have not had too many issues with this game, and playing with my friends has been a blast. Although no offline singleplayer is lame.

#5 Posted by Megotaku77 (418 posts) -

I'm not a Diablo 3 fanboy, in fact I'm one of the most critical commentors on Blizzard period, but there's a big difference between Titan Quest and Diablo 3.  Diablo 3 has randomly generated maps, dungeons, and events.  Titan Quest did not.  Replaying Diablo 3 is playing a different game, whereas Titan Quest never changed.  Of course the maps were bigger, they were the same maps... over and over and over.  

Did you play Diablo 2?  Balance was never the name of the game.  I could 1-shot hell mode Baal with my Bone Necro and I was the only class that could reliably solo hell mode because mobs almost never spawn Magic immune (every other element yes, Magic no) and my bone walls had hundreds of thousands of health points allowing me to box in and forget any mob that was magic immune.

If your cinematics are lagging its because you haven't fully downloaded the game.  Even in the green download section its downloading cinematics, they're loaded last.  So yes, you were streaming the cinematics and that's why they were lagging.  I had lagging cinematics until I let the game fully download and restarted my computer.  

Saying this game deserves a 5 or "they're on Blizzard's payroll" is laughable.  The games already averaging 88% on Metacritic, so you can expect a 9.0 from Gamespot.

#6 Posted by Shiftfallout (2635 posts) -

I'm not a Diablo 3 fanboy, in fact I'm one of the most critical commentors on Blizzard period, but there's a big difference between Titan Quest and Diablo 3.  Diablo 3 has randomly generated maps, dungeons, and events.  Titan Quest did not.  Replaying Diablo 3 is playing a different game, whereas Titan Quest never changed.  Of course the maps were bigger, they were the same maps... over and over and over.  

Did you play Diablo 2?  Balance was never the name of the game.  I could 1-shot hell mode Baal with my Bone Necro and I was the only class that could reliably solo hell mode because mobs almost never spawn Magic immune (every other element yes, Magic no) and my bone walls had hundreds of thousands of health points allowing me to box in and forget any mob that was magic immune.

If your cinematics are lagging its because you haven't fully downloaded the game.  Even in the green download section its downloading cinematics, they're loaded last.  So yes, you were streaming the cinematics and that's why they were lagging.  I had lagging cinematics until I let the game fully download and restarted my computer.  

Saying this game deserves a 5 or "they're on Blizzard's payroll" is laughable.  The games already averaging 88% on Metacritic, so you can expect a 9.0 from Gamespot.

Megotaku77

For starters, D3 does not have randomly generated maps. IN fact most are the same with the only differences being breakable objects placed in different areas. The real randomization is found in the dungeons, however like Diablo 2 you see similar patterns which nearly always link to another piece which if you know what to look for is next to your goal, it eventually does take away from true randomness.

Secondly, cinematics were lagging for people even with a fully downloaded game...ironically in my case i had the game dvd in my cd rom which would be great for cinematics to play from...but oh wait, the dvd blizzard ships is empty except for a 1mb exe which downloads the game from the internet.

The professional reviewers will probably give the game a high review, player scores are generally much lower. Metacritic lists the sum as a 4/10 based on user scores. Dont forget, reviewers who do it for a publication for a living are not always the most objectively based. A bad review, even if the game deserves it, can come back to haunt you. Its a small industry and if you get on a publishers bad list, it can be felt far and wide.

I would bet that if Blizzard sold the IP to another company, maybe one with a bad trackrecord, and they produced this exact game...the reviews would be far worse. The fact is theres a blizzard bias at play.

#7 Posted by kargion (430 posts) -

Been playing since day one.

Issues seen:

In game lag.

Some class in balance

 

I have had no lag in the videos.  I think the game feels and plays like diablo.  Its what i wanted.  This game will not get less than an 8 and it deserves nothing less than a 7.5 just based off launch issues.

#8 Posted by sumdood (482 posts) -

Besides the single-player DRM and launch issues, I found this to be a great game.  All the complaints about the game that aren't internet connection related are the same complaints made about Diablo 2 when it first came out.  I think there are some people that just need to realize that the Diablo franchise isn't their thing.  I'd give it an 8 because of the DRM and sketchy servers, but otherwise it'd be a 9.

#9 Posted by Megotaku77 (418 posts) -

[QUOTE="Megotaku77"]

I'm not a Diablo 3 fanboy, in fact I'm one of the most critical commentors on Blizzard period, but there's a big difference between Titan Quest and Diablo 3.  Diablo 3 has randomly generated maps, dungeons, and events.  Titan Quest did not.  Replaying Diablo 3 is playing a different game, whereas Titan Quest never changed.  Of course the maps were bigger, they were the same maps... over and over and over.  

Did you play Diablo 2?  Balance was never the name of the game.  I could 1-shot hell mode Baal with my Bone Necro and I was the only class that could reliably solo hell mode because mobs almost never spawn Magic immune (every other element yes, Magic no) and my bone walls had hundreds of thousands of health points allowing me to box in and forget any mob that was magic immune.

If your cinematics are lagging its because you haven't fully downloaded the game.  Even in the green download section its downloading cinematics, they're loaded last.  So yes, you were streaming the cinematics and that's why they were lagging.  I had lagging cinematics until I let the game fully download and restarted my computer.  

Saying this game deserves a 5 or "they're on Blizzard's payroll" is laughable.  The games already averaging 88% on Metacritic, so you can expect a 9.0 from Gamespot.

Shiftfallout

For starters, D3 does not have randomly generated maps. IN fact most are the same with the only differences being breakable objects placed in different areas. The real randomization is found in the dungeons, however like Diablo 2 you see similar patterns which nearly always link to another piece which if you know what to look for is next to your goal, it eventually does take away from true randomness.

Secondly, cinematics were lagging for people even with a fully downloaded game...ironically in my case i had the game dvd in my cd rom which would be great for cinematics to play from...but oh wait, the dvd blizzard ships is empty except for a 1mb exe which downloads the game from the internet.

The professional reviewers will probably give the game a high review, player scores are generally much lower. Metacritic lists the sum as a 4/10 based on user scores. Dont forget, reviewers who do it for a publication for a living are not always the most objectively based. A bad review, even if the game deserves it, can come back to haunt you. Its a small industry and if you get on a publishers bad list, it can be felt far and wide.

I would bet that if Blizzard sold the IP to another company, maybe one with a bad trackrecord, and they produced this exact game...the reviews would be far worse. The fact is theres a blizzard bias at play.

Metacritic player reviews are a joke.  Players typically have 2 rankings: 1 and 10.  Let's go through the best selling games this year: 

Mass Effect 3 - 4.0

Assassin's Creed Revelations - 6.8

Modern Warefare 3 - 2.2

The Old Republic - 5.7

Do these games actually deserve these reviews?  Here's the question then: why is it the more popular a game is, the lower the score?  Battlefield 3 is currently averaging 7.3 and it failed hard enough to affect EA's stock prices (its literally listed as the primary reason of stock loss in the recent investor's call).  The reviews don't even come close to reflecting the performance of the game in sales.  I guess us players just love playing terrible games!  Feel free to cite metacritic player reviews, but its a joke I don't know why they don't just close down their player review sections because its just a bunch of forum trolls.

No seriously, look up Metacritic for D3 player reviews by negative reviews.  The highest review in the first 30 hits was 2/10 with more than 90% being a 0/10.  Seriously?  0/10?  You can dislike the game as much as you want, but you're living in a different reality if you think 0/10 is reasonable.  

#10 Posted by Shiftfallout (2635 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shiftfallout"]

[QUOTE="Megotaku77"]

I'm not a Diablo 3 fanboy, in fact I'm one of the most critical commentors on Blizzard period, but there's a big difference between Titan Quest and Diablo 3.  Diablo 3 has randomly generated maps, dungeons, and events.  Titan Quest did not.  Replaying Diablo 3 is playing a different game, whereas Titan Quest never changed.  Of course the maps were bigger, they were the same maps... over and over and over.  

Did you play Diablo 2?  Balance was never the name of the game.  I could 1-shot hell mode Baal with my Bone Necro and I was the only class that could reliably solo hell mode because mobs almost never spawn Magic immune (every other element yes, Magic no) and my bone walls had hundreds of thousands of health points allowing me to box in and forget any mob that was magic immune.

If your cinematics are lagging its because you haven't fully downloaded the game.  Even in the green download section its downloading cinematics, they're loaded last.  So yes, you were streaming the cinematics and that's why they were lagging.  I had lagging cinematics until I let the game fully download and restarted my computer.  

Saying this game deserves a 5 or "they're on Blizzard's payroll" is laughable.  The games already averaging 88% on Metacritic, so you can expect a 9.0 from Gamespot.

Megotaku77

For starters, D3 does not have randomly generated maps. IN fact most are the same with the only differences being breakable objects placed in different areas. The real randomization is found in the dungeons, however like Diablo 2 you see similar patterns which nearly always link to another piece which if you know what to look for is next to your goal, it eventually does take away from true randomness.

Secondly, cinematics were lagging for people even with a fully downloaded game...ironically in my case i had the game dvd in my cd rom which would be great for cinematics to play from...but oh wait, the dvd blizzard ships is empty except for a 1mb exe which downloads the game from the internet.

The professional reviewers will probably give the game a high review, player scores are generally much lower. Metacritic lists the sum as a 4/10 based on user scores. Dont forget, reviewers who do it for a publication for a living are not always the most objectively based. A bad review, even if the game deserves it, can come back to haunt you. Its a small industry and if you get on a publishers bad list, it can be felt far and wide.

I would bet that if Blizzard sold the IP to another company, maybe one with a bad trackrecord, and they produced this exact game...the reviews would be far worse. The fact is theres a blizzard bias at play.

Metacritic player reviews are a joke.  Players typically have 2 rankings: 1 and 10.  Let's go through the best selling games this year: 

Mass Effect 3 - 4.0

Assassin's Creed Revelations - 6.8

Modern Warefare 3 - 2.2

The Old Republic - 5.7

Do these games actually deserve these reviews?  Here's the question then: why is it the more popular a game is, the lower the score?  Battlefield 3 is currently averaging 7.3 and it failed hard enough to affect EA's stock prices (its literally listed as the primary reason of stock loss in the recent investor's call).  The reviews don't even come close to reflecting the performance of the game in sales.  I guess us players just love playing terrible games!  Feel free to cite metacritic player reviews, but its a joke I don't know why they don't just close down their player review sections because its just a bunch of forum trolls.

No seriously, look up Metacritic for D3 player reviews by negative reviews.  The highest review in the first 30 hits was 2/10 with more than 90% being a 0/10.  Seriously?  0/10?  You can dislike the game as much as you want, but you're living in a different reality if you think 0/10 is reasonable.  

The fallacy of your counter post is that you assume sales connote quality and player satisfaction. A bad game can still sell many copies just as a great game can literally fly under the radar and sell very few. The second problem with your post is that you focus entirely on metacritic's user score when its a tiny offhand observation in my post and ignore everything else. Talk about going off on a tangent!
#11 Posted by crognalsen (71 posts) -

I would reiterate that I found Titan's quest fairly boring.  I am enjoying this game a lot more.  The story seems more to my taste and I like the voiced lore.  The items are pretty random and even on normal level once you get to act to you have to start using some form of strategy to stay alive.  You can't just run in and click repeatedly.  I have played with two friends so far and we have all enjoyed it.  The cinematics haven't been an issue for me at all.  Everything has been fairly smooth aside from some very rare server lag when walking around.  Overall this is the best point and click dungeon crawler I have played in a very long time IMO.  If you like Titan Quest better you can always go play it.

#12 Posted by VGjunkie87 (66 posts) -

[QUOTE="Megotaku77"]

I'm not a Diablo 3 fanboy, in fact I'm one of the most critical commentors on Blizzard period, but there's a big difference between Titan Quest and Diablo 3.  Diablo 3 has randomly generated maps, dungeons, and events.  Titan Quest did not.  Replaying Diablo 3 is playing a different game, whereas Titan Quest never changed.  Of course the maps were bigger, they were the same maps... over and over and over.  

Did you play Diablo 2?  Balance was never the name of the game.  I could 1-shot hell mode Baal with my Bone Necro and I was the only class that could reliably solo hell mode because mobs almost never spawn Magic immune (every other element yes, Magic no) and my bone walls had hundreds of thousands of health points allowing me to box in and forget any mob that was magic immune.

If your cinematics are lagging its because you haven't fully downloaded the game.  Even in the green download section its downloading cinematics, they're loaded last.  So yes, you were streaming the cinematics and that's why they were lagging.  I had lagging cinematics until I let the game fully download and restarted my computer.  

Saying this game deserves a 5 or "they're on Blizzard's payroll" is laughable.  The games already averaging 88% on Metacritic, so you can expect a 9.0 from Gamespot.

Shiftfallout

For starters, D3 does not have randomly generated maps. IN fact most are the same with the only differences being breakable objects placed in different areas. The real randomization is found in the dungeons, however like Diablo 2 you see similar patterns which nearly always link to another piece which if you know what to look for is next to your goal, it eventually does take away from true randomness.

Secondly, cinematics were lagging for people even with a fully downloaded game...ironically in my case i had the game dvd in my cd rom which would be great for cinematics to play from...but oh wait, the dvd blizzard ships is empty except for a 1mb exe which downloads the game from the internet.

The professional reviewers will probably give the game a high review, player scores are generally much lower. Metacritic lists the sum as a 4/10 based on user scores. Dont forget, reviewers who do it for a publication for a living are not always the most objectively based. A bad review, even if the game deserves it, can come back to haunt you. Its a small industry and if you get on a publishers bad list, it can be felt far and wide.

I would bet that if Blizzard sold the IP to another company, maybe one with a bad trackrecord, and they produced this exact game...the reviews would be far worse. The fact is theres a blizzard bias at play.

Every user review has to be taken with a grain of salt, anyone can just troll a game, make multiple accounts etc.. you get the point.  I picked up my copy of D3 on friday and was able to install and play the game without any issues, I definitely had no cinematic lag, this sounds like a connection issue, if not then it's not something that will be a permanent problem the game's only been out for 1 week and we do not live in a perfect world, **** happens and it's impossible for Blizzard to simulate all the different situations every person may run in to. 

There might be a couple of review's that have been affected by the problems you've mentioned but I would bet they are few and far between, especially reviewer's working for company's with a lot of reputation and followers (everything is not a conspiracy).  Your technicalities of D3's generating (I don't know the specifics) isn't negating Megataku's point where he compares D3 and Titan Quest, I agree with him.

And for everyone complaining about a required internet connection, I mean it is 2012 and if you don't have an internet connection in this day and age it's almost like not having a telephone in the mid 90's.  If you don't have a internet connection because you can't afford it, then maybe you have bigger worries than playing a video-game, if it's a problem based on location, then maybe you should consider re-locating if it's that big of a problem for you.  Either way no-one wants to hear it, the majority of people I assume have access to an internet connection, and in reality it shouldn't be a major issue.

#13 Posted by Megotaku77 (418 posts) -

The fallacy of your counter post is that you assume sales connote quality and player satisfaction. A bad game can still sell many copies just as a great game can literally fly under the radar and sell very few. The second problem with your post is that you focus entirely on metacritic's user score when its a tiny offhand observation in my post and ignore everything else. Talk about going off on a tangent!Shiftfallout
The rest of your post was irrelevant speculation. My initial point was that D3 maps are randomly generated, TQ's aren't. You said only some of D3's are not all. My original point goes unassailed. I'm not interested in getting into a speculation contest with you. You can feel Blizzard gets better reviews for being Blizzard, but that's unsupported speculation you pulled out of your hat and cannot support.  If players find that compelling argumentation, power to them.  Its uninteresting hater-speak to me.  

You claim the fallacy I made is stating that in a capatalistic economic model inside a luxury-item industry is that sales denote player satisfaction.  I refer you here: http://www.amazon.com/Microeconomics-7th-Edition-Robert-Pindyck/dp/0132080230/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1337759297&sr=8-2.  Luxury items sell based on player satisfaction, game developers aren't selling grain or gasoline.  There's no fallacy.  Good games sell, bad games don't.  The only difference is when a good game has bad marketing.  

If you really think terrible games with bad design break sales records and are willing to say that with a straight face and accuse anyone who disagrees with that opinion of being "fallacious" I refer you here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n5E7feJHw0.

#14 Posted by Shiftfallout (2635 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shiftfallout"] The fallacy of your counter post is that you assume sales connote quality and player satisfaction. A bad game can still sell many copies just as a great game can literally fly under the radar and sell very few. The second problem with your post is that you focus entirely on metacritic's user score when its a tiny offhand observation in my post and ignore everything else. Talk about going off on a tangent!Megotaku77

The rest of your post was irrelevant speculation. My initial point was that D3 maps are randomly generated, TQ's aren't. You said only some of D3's are not all. My original point goes unassailed. I'm not interested in getting into a speculation contest with you. You can feel Blizzard gets better reviews for being Blizzard, but that's unsupported speculation you pulled out of your hat and cannot support.  If players find that compelling argumentation, power to them.  Its uninteresting hater-speak to me.  

You claim the fallacy I made is stating that in a capatalistic economic model inside a luxury-item industry is that sales denote player satisfaction.  I refer you here: http://www.amazon.com/Microeconomics-7th-Edition-Robert-Pindyck/dp/0132080230/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1337759297&sr=8-2.  Luxury items sell based on player satisfaction, game developers aren't selling grain or gasoline.  There's no fallacy.  Good games sell, bad games don't.  The only difference is when a good game has bad marketing.  

If you really think terrible games with bad design break sales records and are willing to say that with a straight face and accuse anyone who disagrees with that opinion of being "fallacious" I refer you here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n5E7feJHw0.

[QUOTE="Shiftfallout"] The fallacy of your counter post is that you assume sales connote quality and player satisfaction. A bad game can still sell many copies just as a great game can literally fly under the radar and sell very few. The second problem with your post is that you focus entirely on metacritic's user score when its a tiny offhand observation in my post and ignore everything else. Talk about going off on a tangent!Megotaku77

The rest of your post was irrelevant speculation. My initial point was that D3 maps are randomly generated, TQ's aren't. You said only some of D3's are not all. My original point goes unassailed. I'm not interested in getting into a speculation contest with you. You can feel Blizzard gets better reviews for being Blizzard, but that's unsupported speculation you pulled out of your hat and cannot support.  If players find that compelling argumentation, power to them.  Its uninteresting hater-speak to me.  

You claim the fallacy I made is stating that in a capatalistic economic model inside a luxury-item industry is that sales denote player satisfaction.  I refer you here: http://www.amazon.com/Microeconomics-7th-Edition-Robert-Pindyck/dp/0132080230/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1337759297&sr=8-2.  Luxury items sell based on player satisfaction, game developers aren't selling grain or gasoline.  There's no fallacy.  Good games sell, bad games don't.  The only difference is when a good game has bad marketing.  

If you really think terrible games with bad design break sales records and are willing to say that with a straight face and accuse anyone who disagrees with that opinion of being "fallacious" I refer you here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n5E7feJHw0.


ROFL wow ...


irrelevant speculation?
Lets break down my post and lets see what what you try to pass off as "irrelevant speculation".
1. D3 does not have randomly generated worldmaps. (this is not speculation, its fact, backed up by people who published maps of multiple playthroughs. The only randomness is in which limited entrance on a static mesh will be open and which items can be hit for loot are present).  
2. Real randomization is in dungeon layouts, though like D2 they use patterns which an observant player can recognize and know where to go. (also not a speculation, its been backed up with both diagrams and videos on the net.)
3. Cinematics were lagging for people, some barely even watchable. If you read the official forums you will know this was a common issue. I have an average download rate of 3mb a second when obtaining files or downloading clients. People did have issues with the cinematics in the game. This is not debatable its not even speculation, nor is it irrelevant when one rates a game. Nice try.
4. The dvd roms that come with the game are empty except for a 1mb internet client downloader.. This is a fact, not "irrelevant speculation. At this point im not even sure you know what the words mean.
5. Reviewers not always being objective in their reviews and one of the reasons why. This is called an OPINION.  As someone who has recieved both  press and dev E3 passes, I would say my experience & industry work gives me a bit more insight into how it works. Its perfectly reasonable to question my OPINION.
6. The last part of my post is clearly a hypothesis focused around the concept of a blizzard bias. Still no irrelevant speculations to be seen.

I have to question your judgement in this regard.

Now lets look at your post.
1. You say user reviews are a joke and that they either rate as a 1 or a 10. Hmm sounds like speculation to me.
2. You assume that sales connote a good and well appreciated game. Hmm speculation? I pointed out the problem of that kind of logic.
3. You provide a theory that the more popular the game, the lower the reviews from users. Ironic since thats the people that buy and play the product. A theory is something yet to be proven. You assume its true.
4. You suggest that im free to cite megacritic user scores as though it were core of my post, rather than an off hand observation found in a tiny sentence and quickly ignored. Seems like you didnt actually read the post and just picked out something, ran with it and speculated, irrelevantly... that its run by "trolls".
5. Who says I think 0/10 is a reasonable score? I didnt even touch on that, yet you did. Sheesh.  If you click user score by date you see a lot of varied reviews, from 0-10. I see a lot of 5's. That makes sense if you consider the game doesnt run for some people, hacking is rampant right now, exploits which are ruining the AH are present and classes are having their skills removed without a notice or patchnote from Blizzard. No wonder people would be pissed.

I would think my argument still stands. This product is far from perfect and that a blizzard bias exists which people try to confirm, both for and against the product. You yourself try to suggest people hate blizzard and people love blizzard, giving them 0 or 10 ratings, yet then say my hypothesis on this bias is pure irrelevant speculation. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
Furthermore you talk about sales records... I could argue farmville has millions of players but does that make it a great game with good design? The point here is that as time goes on, the audience increases in number. You cant say a game 10 years ago will reach the same amount of people as a game today. There are more gamers every single day, in the past it was a niche market...now the game industry brings in more annual revenue than the film, music and tv industries combined for their primary market.

If you look at say Rift, planes of telara...it sold many copies. How many of those who bought the game are still playing it? Their sub numbers dropped after people got a chance to play it. Games can historically sell a lot, sometimes brand name and IP play a huge role in the purchasing power of the product...doesnt mean its great.

Either way I think right now Diablo 3 is a mess. It is far below the quality Blizzard is known for, it lacks smart design choices and its launch is probably one of the worst in Blizzard history. If you are having fun, all the more power to you. Not everyone is having the same reaction though, and one cannot logically dismiss them as trolls or haters.

#15 Posted by johnlewis656 (10 posts) -
They have rated it now & its done. F#$% it & moving on.
#16 Posted by dzimm (4651 posts) -

For starters, D3 does not have randomly generated maps.Shiftfallout

Yes it does.  While some areas are static such as towns and certain locations that require exact placement, everything else is randomized.  Even locations with defined borders randomize the placement of obstacles, breakable containers, and dungeon entrances, not to mention "events" (basically mini-quests) and the placement of monsters.  You can play multiple iterations of the same map and have a different experience every time.

As for player reviews, they basically boil down to a battle between those giving it perfect 10's and those giving it 0's with the latter tending to dominate for some reason.  This skews the scores dramatically making them a very poor indicator of the objective quality of a game.  With professional reviews you have several pages of editorial justifying the score, so even if you disagree with the number, you can at least see the reviewer's reasons for giving it

#18 Posted by Megotaku77 (418 posts) -

ROFL wow ...


irrelevant speculation?
Lets break down my post and lets see what what you try to pass off as "irrelevant speculation".
1. D3 does not have randomly generated worldmaps. (this is not speculation, its fact, backed up by people who published maps of multiple playthroughs. The only randomness is in which limited entrance on a static mesh will be open and which items can be hit for loot are present).  

Whether you want to argue that the randomization didn't go far enough for you or not is still irrelevant to my point.  D3 maps have infinitely more randomization than TQ because TQ had none.  My original point remains unassailed.  Nice try.


2. Real randomization is in dungeon layouts, though like D2 they use patterns which an observant player can recognize and know where to go. (also not a speculation, its been backed up with both diagrams and videos on the net.)

More randomization that TQ and randomization nonetheless.  That was the point.


3. Cinematics were lagging for people, some barely even watchable. If you read the official forums you will know this was a common issue. I have an average download rate of 3mb a second when obtaining files or downloading clients. People did have issues with the cinematics in the game. This is not debatable its not even speculation, nor is it irrelevant when one rates a game. Nice try.

I really couldn't care less about this "point".  All PC games have compatability issues on some PCs without exception.  You could find any number of people having similar technical issues, then other people who have significantly worse issues depending on their system.  You know what's not listed in their technical support forum as a "common known issue"?  Cinematic lag.  Keep prattling on about this, I stopped caring the minute you brought it up.  If this was an issue affecting a significant number of users by percentage of population, you'd have a valid complaint.  This is just trolling right now.

 If you actually have been invited to E3 as press, you're being outrageously dishonest and disingenuous to be bringing up hardware compatability as a main point of contention only affecting a very small portion of population.  So which is it?  Were you lying about being press or are you just too stupid to realize PC games always have some compatability issues?


4. The dvd roms that come with the game are empty except for a 1mb internet client downloader.. This is a fact, not "irrelevant speculation. At this point im not even sure you know what the words mean.

This is irrelevant.  I didn't address this point because its meaningless.  Unless you reformat your hard-drive on a bi-weekly basis how you download the game is irrelevant to the quality of the game.


5. Reviewers not always being objective in their reviews and one of the reasons why. This is called an OPINION.  As someone who has recieved both  press and dev E3 passes, I would say my experience & industry work gives me a bit more insight into how it works. Its perfectly reasonable to question my OPINION.

No review anywhere is objective.  This is another irrelevant point.  Unless making shallow and pedantic statements is your thing.

6. The last part of my post is clearly a hypothesis focused around the concept of a blizzard bias. Still no irrelevant speculations to be seen.

 

"BLIZZARD REVIEWS ARE BOUGHT AND PAID!!!!!  ITS A CONSPIRACY!!!!!"  Would you like your tin foil hat now or later?  This is irrelevant speculation, sorry.


I have to question your judgement in this regard.

Now lets look at your post.
1. You say user reviews are a joke and that they either rate as a 1 or a 10. Hmm sounds like speculation to me.

Its only speculation if you're lazy and dishonest.  You don't even have to run a statistics breakdown when you visit Metacritic player reviews (which is the only website I was referring to) to see the disproportionate allocation of 0/10.  But hey, even for someone as lazy and dishonest as you Metacritic holds your hand to show you how disproportionate the ratings are between high, medium and low ratings with almost no medium reviews to speak of and the vast majority of players on the extremes of ratings.  


2. You assume that sales connote a good and well appreciated game. Hmm speculation? I pointed out the problem of that kind of logic.

I refer you to the microeconomics textbook I linked earlier.  Educate yourself on how capatalistic systems work.  Most people learn this in high school, but some are slower.  The important thing is that you learn it.


3. You provide a theory that the more popular the game, the lower the reviews from users. Ironic since thats the people that buy and play the product. A theory is something yet to be proven. You assume its true.

I already covered this in one of the other threads here regarding Metacritic reviews specifically looking at Modern Warfare 3, Mass Effect 3, and Diablo 3 vs. Stalin vs. Martians, widely considered the worst game ever made.  Stalin vs. Martians is currently tied with Mass Effect 3 and Diablo 3 in review ratings and is ranked twice as high as Modern Warfare 3. This is only speculation is you're lazy and dishonest.  You are lazy and dishonest.  I also referenced Battlefield 3 which is ranked well among Metacritic players but was so unpopular that its specifically referenced in their recent investor's call as a reason for falling stock prices.  Popularity is inversely proportional to Metacritic player reviews, this is a verifiable fact if you weren't too lazy and dishonest to check it.


4. You suggest that im free to cite megacritic user scores as though it were core of my post, rather than an off hand observation found in a tiny sentence and quickly ignored. Seems like you didnt actually read the post and just picked out something, ran with it and speculated, irrelevantly... that its run by "trolls".

Its not speculation, rating distribution statistics verify my assertion.


5. Who says I think 0/10 is a reasonable score? I didnt even touch on that, yet you did. Sheesh.  If you click user score by date you see a lot of varied reviews, from 0-10. I see a lot of 5's. That makes sense if you consider the game doesnt run for some people, hacking is rampant right now, exploits which are ruining the AH are present and classes are having their skills removed without a notice or patchnote from Blizzard. No wonder people would be pissed.

Some people are having issues, most aren't.  This is irrelevant, I refer you back to my hardware compatability comment.  I'm not even referring to the Gamespot community on the subject of player reviews.  I wouldn't be a part of the Gamespot player community if they were as stupid and irrational as Metacritic members.


I would think my argument still stands. This product is far from perfect and that a blizzard bias exists which people try to confirm, both for and against the product. You yourself try to suggest people hate blizzard and people love blizzard, giving them 0 or 10 ratings, yet then say my hypothesis on this bias is pure irrelevant speculation. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
Furthermore you talk about sales records... I could argue farmville has millions of players but does that make it a great game with good design? The point here is that as time goes on, the audience increases in number. You cant say a game 10 years ago will reach the same amount of people as a game today. There are more gamers every single day, in the past it was a niche market...now the game industry brings in more annual revenue than the film, music and tv industries combined for their primary market.

You really need to learn about economics.  How many people are still playing Heavy Rain?  I guess its a terrible game with bad design, by your definition despite it constantly appearing on gamer's top 10 lists.  Sales are what matter.  Hours played doesn't mean anything.  Farmville was a good flash game.  That's why people chose Farmville over the thousands of other flash games and that why they made money on microtransactions.

If you look at say Rift, planes of telara...it sold many copies. How many of those who bought the game are still playing it? Their sub numbers dropped after people got a chance to play it. Games can historically sell a lot, sometimes brand name and IP play a huge role in the purchasing power of the product...doesnt mean its great.

Rift is a subscription service, and their populations are growing since they won Massively's MMO of the Year award 2011.  Unlike most games in the market you don't just purchase and play it.  No idea why you brought up MMO models.

Either way I think right now Diablo 3 is a mess. It is far below the quality Blizzard is known for, it lacks smart design choices and its launch is probably one of the worst in Blizzard history. If you are having fun, all the more power to you. Not everyone is having the same reaction though, and one cannot logically dismiss them as trolls or haters.

I don't dismiss people as trolls or haters unless they earn it.  

Shiftfallout

#19 Posted by trueepower44 (67 posts) -
Best Action RPG to date. Bugs are to be expected, haven't encountered any myself. 9.2/10, could have been a tad longer - or a few more zones in act 3-4. No town in 4, and just 3 wasn't good. Otherwise, its higher than a 9.2.
#20 Posted by RTHKI (161 posts) -

blizzard quality is non existant the past few years

#21 Posted by LUCKENBILL56 (14 posts) -

shiftfallout,

I like your rather through response. I played Diablo 1 & 2 and thought they were very good games. From what I have viewed D3 looks excellent, but I won't purchase the game because I don't do online gaming. It's that simple. I believe if most of the negative feed back was evaluated truthfully we would find the online requirement is the crux of most negative comments. The rest is just frustration. Again, I enjoyed your lengthy educational response.