0 Min of PoE since 15th May

"

thepmrc wrote:

I am on A4 inferno... as I said I would be playing the game. All my friends are playing, it has a real money AH??!!? those are the draws for me. I still have serious problems with the game design... but yeah, get to inferno and then tell me about all of the limitless choice in D3 lols. I guess you might be able to progress in Inferno without using specific skill sets if you had massively outgeared the areas... only problem is in order to 'out gear' A1 Inferno you would need to be farming A3-4 inferno.... or buying from the AH...

Oh and I still enjoyed HGL and wished that it would have had the development time and financial backing of a major publisher.

Dont misquote me man, I dont appreciate that. I will hold off on my judgement until I get there, but I never said it had 'LIMITLESS' choices. Just more choices than D2... which I stand by. It already has that just from normal and nightmare, by a large margin.

Dont know where you get the idea HGL suffered due to no backing or development time. It was in development for about 4 years all told and had some pretty large financial clout from NamcoBandai (believe it was) Indeed in the aftermath of flagship sinking ex-employees revealed that shocking amounts of cash was wasted on frivolous marketing and poor management (like you know forgetting to charge users their monthly subs... /facepalm)

It failed cause the guys making it were dullards.

"

RodHull wrote:

"

Asmodeous666 wrote:

It would be great to see PoE succeed. I haven't played it but from what I have seen it looks to be what D3 should have been. D3 stepped out of it's own genre.
PoE looks like it has taken it in a new direction.

The biggest worry for myself is what happens if GGG fail and the servers are shut down. This has happened to titan quest and hellgate london for example. But in these cases, owners of the games can continue playing the game with their characters and items.
If this happens to GGG and the servers go then PoE is vapourware and players loose everything. Game over.
That is the biggest worry to a new player like myself standing 10 feet back with credit card in hand.

I want to try the game but do I pay? How much time, effort and money dare I risk with a first time dev. How much of a risk is it that I will loose?

First of all stop with the silliness, D3 is precisely the game 'it should have been' as has been shown by it being bloody good fun. If I wanted to play D2 Id play D2, I wanted a new game, a new experience... so please stop with the 'they changed the game to much' rubbish. Its still hella fun to play - check. Its still got loot - check. It is D3 and its exactly what the devs and millions of beta players wanted from it.

Oh and seriously, aside from the skill system and passive tree POE is about as much as a copy of D2 as you can get, not that theres anything wrong in that but it doesnt take anything in a new direction.

That said Id also like to correct you for mentioning Hellgate, that failed cause it was an abortion of a game. I was there during pre-launch and right till they switched the servers off, and it was an awful game on so many levels, it dispelled the myth in one fell swoop that everything Blizzard north did was amazing, as it was made by many people from Blizzard north... It was literally an exercise in how not to make a game, and how not to build a financial model.

TQ failed cause it just wasn't very good. I know it holds peculiar cult status as it was the only D2 alternative for years, but it was a pretty poor game. Like it or not poor games fail, good games succeed. Same will go for POE.

I firmly believe GGG will have to be more mercenary with the noble cash shop ideals but if they can square that with the community I Have no doubt this game will find a place for itself in the gaming world.

Above I have highlighted what the 'newcomer' said and italicised your responses.

The first was clearly an opinion and it's one shared by quite a few people. Is Diablo 3 what Diablo 3 meant to be? Of course. What that is, we won't discuss; what we're here to do is clarify why your responses made you look like a prick. Literally -- you pricked his slightly inflated opinion of PoE with a needless assertion that his opinion was silly and rubbish. You might not agree with it; that's no cause to go trashing his views at all.

The second was regarding Hellgate. He had every right to mention Hellgate as an example of what happens when a company fails and the servers go down; you can't 'correct' someone for mentioning that. You can correct the facts used to justify the mentioning, but the actual mentioning itself cannot be corrected. That and you were being facetious, not really disagreeing with him at all. Whether it's due to HGL being a poor game, Flagship screwing up...whatever. The game failed and the servers went down. We won't discuss what happened next because it's irrelevant.

And after all these so-called corrections of his opinions and views, you had the gall to say the last thing I've italicised. There are plenty of reasons floating around why TQ/IT didn't do so well, and quite a few point at THQ more than at Iron Lore. Buggy gameplay, poor support -- sounds vaguely Flagshippy to me. That and we have no idea how many units have sold through Steam -- which is how I got the game on the cheap and very much felt it was a worthy purchase as recently as last year.

I don't think the most important part of your quote was about PoE at all. Clearly you hope and want PoE to succeed; you're still here, and elsewhere still making pretty good, informative posts.

Like I said, you are entertaining. Your slight inability to match tone to intent (I'm sure you didn't mean to insult Asmodeous but it sure looked like it), your hypocrisy and, probably my favourite, your myopic focus. I like your posts a lot more when you use that laser-guided sight of yours to point out flaws in PoE, end-game or otherwise. That, at least, wis helpful and insightful. These last few posts regarding Other Games have been almost unpleasant in their dismissal of others' views.

"

RodHull wrote:

First of all stop with the silliness, D3 is precisely the game 'it should have been' as has been shown by it being bloody good fun.

TQ failed cause it just wasn't very good.

I like how one guy's personal opinion, which is shared by many others, that D3 wasn't what it should have been is not acceptable to you, however your personal opinion that Titan Quest just flat-out "wasn't very good" is, apparently, not silliness.


Come on, man. Even if we agree with you it's still opinion.


As for the actual point. I hope PoE's servers never go down too. And they won't, so long as we keep supporting it.

@ both above posts...

I can say with absolute authority that D3 was precisely the game 'it should have been' cause its been made that way by developers who have spent over 10 years watching market trends learning what gamers want and its massive sales and general good reception is proof indeed that most gamers (despite the vocal minority) did NOT want D2:V2 which is basically what most posts like that one (the one I replied to) are saying if you read between the lines.

D3 is what it is, period. Who is he, you or anyone else to suggest it was 'meant to be something else' and you call me out for presenting my opinions as fact!! Yeah good one.

Now if the developers all along had suggested that actually it would be basically D2:V2 and then released it as it is now, I could understand that view cause people would have been misled. But it was clear as far back as when the first announcement was made about D3 that it was going to be a very different direction than D2. Thats why I can say what I say without presenting that as opinion, but fact. Cause it is a fact... It might not be a fact your all comfortable with or even agree with, but its a fact. To suggest it should have been something else, is opinion. To state it is what it is and we all knew what we were getting is fact... see the difference?

I can also claim TQ wasn't very good because it failed... end of story. Great games dont fail, and even if I give it the benefit of the doubt, when the expansion was released, that also failed. It took the D2 formula, added very little, made most systems slightly worse and put that together with a bloated and resource hungry client = fail!

The setting was promising, thats about it. POE takes the D2 formula (as a counterpoint) generally improves most things and puts that together with a streamlined and efficient client = Win!

Again see the difference?

If you want to get into 'well I thought it was good' so thats opinion thats fine. But consensus tells us (does it not) that your opinion is wrong, the fact it failed, its expansion failed and the company folded. Its metacritic score after many years and 51 professional reviews is just 77% which doesnt indicate greatness, marry that with a terrible client/engine and poor support and yeah thats why it failed.

As for me making myself 'look like a prick' well its a bloody good job I dont concern myself with total strangers opinions of me isn't it. And if the guy I replied to was offended, well to quote some of the fanbois here who directed hatred and abuse at D3 fans 'learn not to have your delicate sensibilities offended so easily'

"

RodHull wrote:

I can say with absolute authority that D3 was precisely the game 'it should have been' cause its been made that way by developers who have spent over 10 years watching market trends learning what gamers want and its massive sales and general good reception is proof indeed that most gamers (despite the vocal minority) did NOT want D2:V2 which is basically what most posts like that one (the one I replied to) are saying if you read between the lines.

It's not proof what people wanted d3 to be. It only proof that the game is good. If the game is good, no matter if people like the direction or not, the game will sell a lot (if people know about the game).

"

RodHull wrote:

Now if the developers all along had suggested that actually it would be basically D2:V2 and then released it as it is now, I could understand that view cause people would have been misled. But it was clear as far back as when the first announcement was made about D3 that it was going to be a very different direction than D2.

Back then when they announced it, d3 is not the same as today game, with a lot of thing that changed. D3 in 2008 was different than today d3 with different mechanics, and a lot of other things. The fact is they changed the game over the years.

"

RodHull wrote:

I can also claim TQ wasn't very good because it failed... end of story. Great games dont fail, and even if I give it the benefit of the doubt, when the expansion was released, that also failed. It took the D2 formula, added very little, made most systems slightly worse and put that together with a bloated and resource hungry client = fail!

Great games fail if people don't know about them. TQ didn't failed because they didn't sell good, they had good income, and where preparing to create TQ2 but failed because of publisher. Don't talk about something like you are sure if you don't know the background of the developer team.
As the game it self, it is played a lot to this day, with also large active modding support.

"

vanwavanwa wrote:

God D3 is awesome, I hope it quieted down a lot of the kids saying it wasn't going to be good.

It's not, and it didn't. as was said it's a fun mindless game for one playthrough, but with the current itemization and mechanics there is just no replayability.

I am a diablo nut, and couldn't wait for this. I love the lore, the world, everything. i am very disappointed with d3.

"

RodHull wrote:

I can also claim TQ wasn't very good because it failed... end of story. Great games dont fail, and even if I give it the benefit of the doubt, when the expansion was released, that also failed. It took the D2 formula, added very little, made most systems slightly worse and put that together with a bloated and resource hungry client = fail!

Failed? End of story? LOLOOLOL. After 7 years the game is still played, this moment there are more than 100 host games. They earned a lot of money so started to work on TQ2 before THQ closed them. There is a huge community that is active. The game didn't failed at all, if you didn't like the game, it doesn't mean it failed. Do little search next time before saying something funny like this.

"

RodHull wrote:

@ both above posts...

I can say with absolute authority that (words)

If you believe games that do what market trends and all that dictate are "what they should be," and that nobody is allowed to disagree with you on that criteria ... and that games that you don't like can simply be asserted as fact to not be any good and again, others cannot possibly disagree with you ... then it's not worth the effort to discuss in logical terms with you.

Have fun telling others what they have to think. :(

Yeah Rod also ignored my comment about TQ selling over a million copies and making a healthy profit for the publisher.

His argument is like if I said Rolls Royce cars are crap and a failure because the current owner Volkswagen decides they no longer want to make luxury cars and closes them down.

Dear Rod,

Next time you plan to play the apathy card, please do so before asking a 'total stranger' to explain himself when making a negative claim about your behaviour. That way, I'll know where you stand, where I stand, and that neither stance is worth any interaction. The apathy card *after* asking someone to explain why they've possibly insulted you and how is, in my opinion, the epitome of weakness. But since you don't care, I'm mostly saying this for my own benefit...and entertainment.


Regards

A stranger on the internet.