Difference between Blizzard and GGG

"

Asphael wrote:

"

xxnoob wrote:

You want a serious post? You're a pathetic excuse for a consumer, you're the perfect consumer in the eyes of greedy and powerful people, the same people who run Blizzard now, because you will throw money at them even if they want to make your gaming experience worse.

Blizzard had good reputation, now the only reputation it has is it makes casual games and is stepping over the line with intrusive DRM.

Enjoy getting disconnected when you're playing single player in hardcore against a high level boss.

And don't waste your fingertips because I am not gonna reply to You again.

1. Please don't insult other people.
2. Boy you will be outraged if you find out about the PoE shop... there are some people here that "throw" a great amount of money at GGG. Blizz wants to make your gaming experience worse... mhm.. sounds unlogical and false. Blizz pays hundred thousands of dollars to give the their dev team enough time to try out different game mechanics and so on.. and you know why? Because they want their game to be succesful and fun to play (great gaming experience ;)).
3. Blizz reputation is still good, because they keep delivering good products. There is a reason they developed the #1 MMORPG, #1 aRPG and #1 RTS

4. Wow.. I actually agree, the online-only thing is shit.. but sadly thats a trend that started with steam years ago.

5.You do know that disconnects can also happen in PoE, which by the way, doesn't feature a Singleplayer either. And if your internet connection isn't stable,... don#t play hardcore.

1. It's the truth about what I think about him and others.
2. <invalid>
3. Nope.
4. It didn't start with Steam, this is not the same thing at all.
5. I am not paying for PoE (well I am, but I don't have to) and it's not a single player game. PoE open weekend went relatively smoothly, D3 was a complete disaster.

"

xxnoob wrote:

You want a serious post? You're a pathetic excuse for a consumer, you're the perfect consumer in the eyes of greedy and powerful people, the same people who run Blizzard now, because you will throw money at them even if they want to make your gaming experience worse.

Wow. Way to really turn me on to the PoE community. Personal attacks based on your opinion, taken to extremes. With comparisons to rape. That's like 4 kinds of silly right there.

And, who are you to tell me what I should and should not like, let alone what I do and do not like?

Let me tell you who I am (Besides "some random schmoe on the internet.):

I am a game designer - not professional (which is to say, that's not how I make my living.). I have contributed (substancially so, in some cases) to professionally released computer games, board games, CCGs, and D20 suppliments, with content, rules, and playtesting.

So who cares? Well, *I* care. It makes me appreciate things like the "false choice" discussions of the D2 skill system versus D3 "load out" system. It means that some games that other people find very fun, I find much less so, because the "design" can get in the way of "fun" for me (an example of this is Dominion. All my friends who have played it, love it. I can't help by critize the card draw, tempo, pacing, skill vs luck balance, and a few other things...) The reverse is probably true. D3 may be a game that many people will find "not-fun", and perhaps I only enjoy it to the extent that I do (hint: it's not unreservedly and fanatically.) because I'm thinking about the elegance of the design, more than the more raw and esoteric "fun".

Should you care? Not really. That doesn't make me more of an expert on what you find fun (although, it gives me some insight into what "people" find fun.). But, in so far as, you know, not assuming you're the be-all-end-all of what is good and what is not...

@xxnoob.

Implying diablo 3 is a singleplayer game, even though it's built from the ground up to work solely with an online platform, and is built heavily with co-op in mind.

As for the open beta:

I played for roughly 10 hours in the D3 beta without any problems, and that excludes the many hours I spent with the game in the background while doing something else, in which I could've played the game as well.
And sure, there were problems, but comparing a beta test that had a max of 10.000 people simultaneously online, to one that had more than 315.000 people on at the same time, is madness to begin with.

"

Tagek wrote:

@xxnoob.

Implying diablo 3 is a singleplayer game, even though it's built from the ground up to work solely with an online platform, and is built heavily with co-op in mind.

As for the open beta:

I played for roughly 10 hours in the D3 beta without any problems, and that excludes the many hours I spent with the game in the background while doing something else, in which I could've played the game as well.
And sure, there were problems, but comparing a beta test that had a max of 10.000 people simultaneously online, to one that had more than 315.000 people on at the same time, is madness to begin with.

If you accept the madness that is always online drm, then you're mad yourself.

Also if you want to compare 10.000 people to 315.000 people, compare GGG size as a company to Blizzard-Activision.

"

xxnoob wrote:

"

derbefrier wrote:

lol the only difference is the amount of money in their bank accounts. you guys sure are delusional. besides with millions of fans compared to PoEs few thousand(which an even smaller percentage regularly post) its much easier to get involved in the community but you look at blizz which has millions of fans. its simply impossible to address everything and probably not a good idea to do so as speculation often becomes out of control over there and a blue saying one thing will lead to all kinds of idiots crying the sky is falling and reading way to much into it.

I like these guys too(they got me to spend 25 bucks on a unfinished game not something i do regularly) they are small group that made a pretty awesome D2 clone. I plan on coming back to this after i conquer D3(hopefully by then the game will be officially out or at least in open beta).

And your claims that a majority of players are unhappy with the changes in D3 is nonsense. I know they exist but be honest D3 will be a massive success and a hell of a lot of fun if you can get past this thought that customization can only be done with stats points Diablo 3 has and will continue to prove that wrong.

Just because it's popular, doesn't mean it's better. Blizzard is forever doomed to make casual games until it is disbanded.

What is a casual game? In wow, you can't kill the last bosses unless you spend more time then a normal "casual" gamer does. End game raiding in wow is far from casual.

If you wanted to grind the ladder and be the first to 99 in d2 when it was resetted, you couldn't be a normal casual gamer.

If you want to win GSL in korea, you can't be a casual sc2 player.

If you want to race in d3 and be one of the first to clear inferno, you can't be casual.

In fact, I think Blizzard has done some of the most hardcore games out there for people who wants to spend alot of time.

But maybe i just missunderstood what you meant with casual ;)

If you want the game to be casual, you play it casual. Every single game out there can be played in a casual way.

"

xxnoob wrote:

If you accept the madness that is always online drm, then you're mad yourself.

So PoE players are mad?


PoE is far more of a singleplayer game than D3, there you are actually encouraged to group with a great loot system and a very simple and easy to use group finding mechanic.
Here, on the other hadn, you are discouraged to play in groups.

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

"

Tagek wrote:

Actually, it is. :P

Hell, you people contradict yourselves. If blizzard is the money hungry cow-milker you portray it as, and you are in fact not a minority, then why haven't they changed the game to your likings?

Also, I'm a huge fan of D2 and I will be playing the hell out of D3.

You are creating a false comparison. The term he used was 'significant number'. Significant is a relative term, and doesn't necessarily mean a majority. It's a judgement call weather or not you call it a 'small minority', or a 'significant number'. But even 20-30% can be a significant number. It's not a majority, but with a customer base as large as the Diablo franchise has that would be fairly significant. Even at 10-15% it's a fairly large number of upset people. Not a majority, but one could argue the number IS significant.

Not saying I agree with xxnoob, but you were also creating a false comparison.

Not sure if it was you, but someone mensioned that it was not a vocal minority. It can only not be a minority if it's a majority. (If you divide people into 2 groups, anyway.)

"

xxnoob wrote:

"

Tagek wrote:

@xxnoob.

Implying diablo 3 is a singleplayer game, even though it's built from the ground up to work solely with an online platform, and is built heavily with co-op in mind.

As for the open beta:

I played for roughly 10 hours in the D3 beta without any problems, and that excludes the many hours I spent with the game in the background while doing something else, in which I could've played the game as well.
And sure, there were problems, but comparing a beta test that had a max of 10.000 people simultaneously online, to one that had more than 315.000 people on at the same time, is madness to begin with.

If you accept the madness that is always online drm, then you're mad yourself.

Also if you want to compare 10.000 people to 315.000 people, compare GGG size as a company to Blizzard-Activision.

That's where you go wrong though.
The bigger servers get, they also get far more complex.
It's not a question of 'just hire more people if you have a bigger server'. That's not how it works.

"

Tagek wrote:

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

"

Tagek wrote:

Actually, it is. :P

Hell, you people contradict yourselves. If blizzard is the money hungry cow-milker you portray it as, and you are in fact not a minority, then why haven't they changed the game to your likings?

Also, I'm a huge fan of D2 and I will be playing the hell out of D3.

You are creating a false comparison. The term he used was 'significant number'. Significant is a relative term, and doesn't necessarily mean a majority. It's a judgement call weather or not you call it a 'small minority', or a 'significant number'. But even 20-30% can be a significant number. It's not a majority, but with a customer base as large as the Diablo franchise has that would be fairly significant. Even at 10-15% it's a fairly large number of upset people. Not a majority, but one could argue the number IS significant.

Not saying I agree with xxnoob, but you were also creating a false comparison.

Not sure if it was you, but someone mensioned that it was not a vocal minority. It can only not be a minority if it's a majority. (If you divide people into 2 groups, anyway.)

That was me I believe, and if you want to get all technical, then yes, a "vocal minority" is complaining about what Blizzard did to the Diablo franchise.

Either way, it's still a significant and large (both subjective words) group of Diablo fans that are very upset right now. Of the 20 people I know who tried the beta, most of them were quite upset. Sure, they thought the sounds and smoothness of the gameplay was good, but they were quite upset about the skill system, and even more upset about the information we know on the PvP system.

That's not saying I won't buy Diablo 3 because I probably will, just to play through the story (since I'm a fan of the lore as well), but I already have the feeling I'll be spending much more time in PoE.