D3 insane legendaries buff!

"

Charan wrote:

I seriously hope Blizzard appreciate the tenacity of their loyal customers. So few game companies are afforded the number of fuck ups they have managed and still been forgiven, even praised for their belated fixes.

But they probably don't.

Glad D3 is getting what people think it needs. Always.

But as an ex blizzard advocate, I question their reactive method. They made the greatest ARPG, the benchmark, and still they are making "mistakes" that former paradigm did not, such as bland uniques aka legendaries. Oh, D2 had some dull uniique items, yes, but it had some truly memorable ones too.

After all, where did PoE get its concept of "unique" from, if not there?

For D3 to get that "wrong" when its predecessor mastered it and it SO easy to mimic is utterly incomprehensible to me.

But hey, better late than...especially for blizzard, who knew from the start that they could afford to screw up and that when they "fixed" things their fans would praise the rectification rather than question the need for one in the first place.

I guess that knowledge of the forgiving nature of the fan base is a form of appreciation...albeit a rather abusive one.

I agree completly and I must admit I am more than just astonished and furious seeing how many flaws in the game-design there are.

But the reason people hail blizzard after they finally managed to bring out a good product after one year of patches is that most of the times it is simply the best.
Especially in the aRPG genre we have had very little competition over the last years, now with PoE/TL2/GD and Diablo 3 on the market (or in development) this might change.

"

Avireyn wrote:

Blizzard has one of the largest, most devotedly-fanatical fanbases this side of the Sol system (Apple and major religions excluded. Probably).
They would have been set up perfectly to have enough beta testers to test all kinds of things in all manner of tests.
But they didn't utilize that potential. They had a tiny in-house beta for the whole game, and the rest of the fanbase was given a tiny fraction of the game to play. Nope, you can't test the game properly on the first half of the first Act in the first difficulty setting.

How much would PoE be changed if we all could only play to Brutus on normal?

Does it matter if Blizzard supports the game now? You bet it does. It's one of the reasons Blizzard became so popular: Their continuing support for every product, even if revenue came from boxsales alone, and not subs.

To not continue this would be akin to go over the edge. Either of seeing your customers as walking wallets and nothing more, or of being on the edge of bankrupcy and not having the money to afford that kind of support any more. Like Trokia games, which dissolved after VTMB, leaving it to the community to patch their game.

Either way spells doom for Blizzard.

You missed my point. What I was saying is that at this point it doesn't matter if the game had a proper beta or not. D3 1.0.4 would be the same as D3 1.0 with large-scale testing. We just wouldn't of been able to play D3 for the past few months.

im more interested in the skill changes. stronger items dont really affect me that much since it would just make the fights a little shorter. it gives me a chance to sell them at a higher price i suppose.

D3 is garbage and i dont think any amount of patches will make it anywhere close to my original expectations. Just feels like Diablo:Arcade/broker simulator. Only reason i played it for so long is that i made quite a lot of € easily. But thats actualy terrible, the game is povered by greed and not fun, its a sin to sell one of best game franchises to freaking Activision and turn in into child sweet shop. Shame shame....

"

ongZ wrote:

Unless they remove the everlasting cutscenes, I will see the game as a game for small children.

Agreed. I think I broke my Esc and Space bars.

But the thing that really drove me insane (yes, really) was the constant talking my character did. I would never say the inane things my Wizard said, let alone scream "I am unstoppable!" every 10 seconds to an empty room.

Put a boastful person in front of me who constantly tells me how awesome she is, and I am going to hate her.

I felt like I was babysitting a snot-nosed, petulant little brat, rather than playing a character I invested in, and should care about.

"

FIreskull wrote:

Srsly how is it even legal to ban ppl like this??

I was banned from a (non-game) forum once. The full story goes like this:

I was sitting at home, doing some research online for a book I was writing and decided that joining a forum might be a good idea. That way I could do some research and meet people at the same time. I read a few posts, answered a few and decided it was a nice forum. A few days later, I sent a PM to a woman on the forum and asked her if she wanted to be friends (quite literally), and she actually accepted. So we talked for a while, in a casual, friendly tone. Another woman sent me a PM about something, and we ended up being friends. And finally, there was a woman wanting help with something, so I sent her a PM and offered my assistance. She too became my friend. So in two weeks, I had three friends on the forum.

Skip ahead a week, and I woke up as usual, went to the computer, logged in to the forum and saw I had a message - from a moderator. He said the word "stalker" had been used about me, and not in a good way. He had proof, too. I told him that I had talkd to the first woman a few days earlier and said I could stalk her, then pop up behind her with a big box of chocolate. It was just a joke, and she knew it. We were still friends, and she had said similar stuff about me. I ended up asking telling her about how the moderator gave me a warning, but she had no idea what I was talking about. I told the moderator that, but he got quite upset and said I was wasting both his and my time, and refused to listen. All I wanted was to clear up the misunderstanding, or at least know what the heck was going on. But in the end, I got upset, wrote a fake PM to the moderator where he admit he was a stalkler just to show him how easy it was to fake proof, and I got banned for life.

Now here's the really weird part. I had been on the forum about three weeks at this time, and had made a total of 31 posts. I had three friends so far, and all three stayed friends even after I got banned. But if none of them were the one who called me a stalker, who did? I guess I will never know.

Guess the point is you can meet all sorts of people online, and not everyone are nice or... 'all there', if you know what I mean. :p Just because a person is a moderator, it doesn't mean he's the sharpest knife in the drawer. It's fully possible to be a person of power and a jerk offline, so 'of course' that's fully possible online too. ;)

(this isn't directed at anyone on this forum, of course.)

"

Charan wrote:

on the topic of dull-witted mods

"

ExileDude wrote:

Just because a person is a moderator, it doesn't mean he's the sharpest knife in the drawer.

I like spoons.

Rusty spoons.

http://www.rathergood.com/spoonguard

:P

"

_Detra_ wrote:

"

jyml8582 wrote:

By this point everyone should've known how blizzard operates now.

1. Dish out promising updates.
2. Gullible players return after the update.
3. Nerf everything back to the ground again after 2 weeks.
4. Post absurd reasons why they nerf'd everything.
5. Enact forum bans & silent treatment to enraged community.
6. Wait 2 months.
7. Repeat from #1.

If I may be quite frank, only idiots still believe in blizzard after that 2 months charade.

Lets be logical here and look at it from the correct perspective. Blizzard did the same thing with Diablo 2....matter of fact it happened nearly EXACTLY the same way...the first year of Diablo 2 people hated it and were very upset and even pissed off about it. Then all of the sudden after patches and fixes it took off like a storm.
Historically this is how they have operated on almost all of the games they have made.

I would like to post some basic facts here for you though...

1. Even with all the flaming and complaining by the end of this year Diablo 3 will STILL be the most populated and highest selling ARPG of 2012.

2. Blizzard will continue to tweak the game in 2013.

3. The game itself is commercialized and promotes lazyness by offering playing the game as a source of actual income.(If you hate D3 this is THE MOST logical reason to hate it all other reasons are trivial and will be fixed)

4. WoW will actually bounce back in some of it's population when SWTOR goes free to play. (The SWTOR community is pretty upset at this move especially the ones that have been paying to play not to mention the game is solidly dying and is the main source of WoW losing players)

5. Also Historically WoWs expansions give about a 1 million people boost every first year of an expansion.

Why do i even mention WoW? It is simple, "business tactics". While they are tweaking D3 the new expansion for WoW will be out for a distraction. By the time the expansion gets old D3 will be darn near perfect and settled in.

Personally I am not a HUGE fan of blizzard but they used this tactic last time with D2 and they are using it again..last time it was WC3 causing the distraction...this time a WoW expansion.

People make all these "jokes" about Jay wilson...and YES he is a moron...but the marketing and sales crew ARE NOT.

Even if D3 becomes a TOTAL FLOP after the fixes...they have plenty of income to afford a flop and hey...who knows maybe it would encourage them to start working on Ghost again.

My opinion of what will happen is that unlike D2 which has gone down in history as one of the most beloved ARPG's of all time. D3 will go down in history as one of the most controversial and hated of all time. This promising patch people are talking about does not fix the game. D3 still has no decent end game, itemization, or customization. I don't think that its inherent suckiness can be patched away. D2 was NOT this bad from the start. No way.

p.s. Even if they could make the game playable I would still not go back just because I am ticked off that they figured that we would be fine with beta testing their game for them after releasing it. What kind of screwed up way of making a game is that? They kept saying that it would be released when "Its finished" or better late and great. Then they release the turd and slowly try to patch the suckiness out of it? Thats bull, screw them.

"

Antilurker77 wrote:

You missed my point. What I was saying is that at this point it doesn't matter if the game had a proper beta or not. D3 1.0.4 would be the same as D3 1.0 with large-scale testing. We just wouldn't of been able to play D3 for the past few months.

That is a peculiar way of looking at it. I'd say that if they had tested it properly large-scale a year back, many of the inherent flaws (that aren't gone with 1.04) could have been avoided.
As it stands, Diablo 3 is just not a very good game, and likely never will be.

And I don't pay full price for a game just to play it now when it technically and apparently still is in Beta status. That's "abusing your customers" at its finest.
In my view, they could have taken until 2017 as long as the end product was worthy of the Diablo name.
They popped it out in Mid-March 2012, and it's a far cry from being worth the name. 1.04 or not.

I concur with iamstryker on this one:

"

This promising patch people are talking about does not fix the game. D3 still has no decent end game, itemization, or customization. I don't think that its inherent suckiness can be patched away. D2 was NOT this bad from the start. No way.