If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the
FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to
register or
login before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
| 5 OCT 2011 at 4:57pm |
markornikovJourneyman
.jpg)
Posts : 1301
Joined: 28 OCT 2011
Location: BE, Antwerp
Status : Offline | Aren't you supposed to be studying!!!
too answer your question, NO i won't be getting it.
I've always hated CRPG's with an isometric view, it completely ruins immersion and lacks detail. :-/
|
| 5 OCT 2011 at 7:31pm |
FnordSchattenjger
Posts : 2751
Joined: 15 SEP 2008
Location: SE, Stockholm
Status : Offline | No, it will have an "always online" DRM, and I'm not buying games that I know will contain those. I sadly bought SC2, which also has that, but I was unaware that it had it until after it was too late. I don't like intrusive DRMs, so always online or limited activations are two things that will make me consider not buying said game.
"Always online" does not bother me when it comes to multiplayer only games, of course. But for single player games it is a big issue.
|
| 5 OCT 2011 at 7:58pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4039
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Fnord (5 OCT 2011 7:31pm)
No, it will have an "always online" DRM, and I'm not buying games that I know will contain those. I sadly bought SC2, which also has that, but I was unaware that it had it until after it was too late. I don't like intrusive DRMs, so always online or limited activations are two things that will make me consider not buying said game.
"Always online" does not bother me when it comes to multiplayer only games, of course. But for single player games it is a big issue.
Agreed. Plus i agree with markonikov about the viewpoint. I can handle it in old games, when grpahics were horrible anyway, but in a brand-new game, I can simply not forgive it. If you could handle followers in game like Dragon Age : O, with a lower viewpoint, why the heck does one have to put up with it in Diablo 3.
In any case, many games with followers don't have that horrible isometric viewpoint, and in Diablo 3 you will aparently have max 3 followers, so i don't see the need for it.
In any case, the constant online requirement alone is already enough to sell me into boycotting the game. But with the isometric viewpoint, just as well. Bah.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 5 OCT 2011 at 9:40pm |
FnordSchattenjger
Posts : 2751
Joined: 15 SEP 2008
Location: SE, Stockholm
Status : Offline | I really don't mind an isometric viewpoint. In a clickfeast like Diablo, it is probably better than having a full 3D camera, as you can focus on the rapid clicking and not have to worry about the camera. Diablo 3 looks like it is staying far away from innovation, as it looks like Diablo 2 but more technically advanced.
|
| 5 OCT 2011 at 10:02pm |
ShyRatelIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 1
Joined: 5 OCT 2011
Status : Online | "Since release seems to be more or less set now for Q1 2012"
it's Blizzard, probably they will change release date 3 more times
|
| 6 OCT 2011 at 10:47am |
FnordSchattenjger
Posts : 2751
Joined: 15 SEP 2008
Location: SE, Stockholm
Status : Offline | True. has blizzard ever released a game on time?
|
| 6 OCT 2011 at 1:34pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Originally Posted By Fnord (6 OCT 2011 10:47am)
True. has blizzard ever released a game on time?
Nope and that's actually a good thing since Blizzard games are not released until they've been thoroughly tested, which has resulted in relatively bug-free products over the past 15 years.
Cheers, Terry
|
| 6 OCT 2011 at 6:37pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4039
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Um, guys... this game is almost 3 years late as it is... it was announced in June 2008 already....
Maybe it's time to start wrapping things up somewhere in 2012?
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 6 OCT 2011 at 11:06pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Originally Posted By placeholder (6 OCT 2011 6:37pm)
Um, guys... this game is almost 3 years late as it is... it was announced in June 2008 already....
Maybe it's time to start wrapping things up somewhere in 2012?
To be fair, Diablo 3 isn't three years late, Trav.
It was first announced publicly about three years ago, but Blizzard never promised a fast release date and we all know they do e.x.t.e.n.s.i.v.e SP and MP beta testing before going gold.
However, many fans have found the long delay between Diablo 2 and Diablo 3 (11 years and counting) to be hellish - since the wait between Diablo and Diablo 2 was only around four years. So it's understandable why they are getting a bit anxious at this point.
Cheers, Terry
.
|
| 7 OCT 2011 at 10:29am |
FnordSchattenjger
Posts : 2751
Joined: 15 SEP 2008
Location: SE, Stockholm
Status : Offline | They should not be allowed to complain, I'm still waiting for a sequel to Blackthorn or Rock 'n roll racing
Nope and that's actually a good thing since Blizzard games are not released until they've been thoroughly tested, which has resulted in relatively bug-free products over the past 15 years.
I agree. They should say that the games will be released when they are done rather than set a release date that they will push back anyway though.
|
| 22 APR 2012 at 4:09am |
markornikovJourneyman
Posts : 1301
Joined: 28 OCT 2011
Location: BE, Antwerp
Status : Offline | Blizzard is holding an open beta weekend for Diablo 3.
I'm going to check it out, although i assume it won't be my cup of tea
|
| 22 APR 2012 at 7:19am |
markornikovJourneyman
Posts : 1301
Joined: 28 OCT 2011
Location: BE, Antwerp
Status : Offline | as expected, the crappy isometric view is totally ruining the fun and ofcourse it seems completely linear.
nope, this isn't my kind of RPG.
Back to the witcher it is
|
| 22 APR 2012 at 7:54am |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4039
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Funny that, given their resouces and the technology available today, they had not chosen to make it an adjustable viewpoint. Oh well.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 22 APR 2012 at 9:57am |
Mr Innocent.Journeyman
Posts : 1316
Joined: 15 JAN 2008
Location: GR
Status : Offline | The only thing that could have kept me from buying Diablo III other than the "always online" scheme, would be if they fiddled with the classic isometric view. If only more developers had the guts to not fix what isn't broken in the name of "innovation" and "streamlining".
At any rate, I just tried the open beta. Good, classic diablo fun, until I lost an hour of progress due to a connection error. In a single player game. Laughable. Thanks, but no thanks, Blizzard.
|
| 22 APR 2012 at 11:25am |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4039
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Mr Innocent. (22 APR 2012 9:57am)
The only thing that could have kept me from buying Diablo III other than the "always online" scheme, would be if they fiddled with the classic isometric view. If only more developers had the guts to not fix what isn't broken in the name of "innovation" and "streamlining".
At any rate, I just tried the open beta. Good, classic diablo fun, until I lost an hour of progress due to a connection error. In a single player game. Laughable. Thanks, but no thanks, Blizzard.
That, just there, is why I'm prepared to buy 2 copies of a game with no DRM on it, just to show my support for such a dev. (Bought a copy of the Witcher 1 as well as a seperate copy of TW EE, and did the same with Witcher 2)
..and Mr. I, why can't a dev respect players who prefer the top-down view as well as players who don't like it, and just give both that and over the shoulder view? Is Diablo 3 even party-based?
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
Last edited by Traveller : 22 APR 2012 11:27am
|
| 22 APR 2012 at 1:23pm |
StilerJourneyman
Posts : 1458
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, TN
Status : Offline | Diablo has never been a "party based" really, I mean you can have npc's with you, but it's usually not under your control really.
The isometeric style to me suits it fine, it's a click fest, and having the isometeric view works so well, I don't see how you'd have a game like Diablo and make it over the shoulder, it just wouldn't work that well (clicking enemies and things constnatly, with large groups, etc).
OTW works great for more tactical paced games or rpgs or action games, but this type of game, like Diablo (Sacred, Titan Quest, etc) has for hte most part always been isometeric viewpoint.
Playing the beta so far this weekend and I'm enjoying it, but it doesn't seem to really be anything "new." I guess Blizzard doens't really like to push any innovation or change anything, their motto shoudl be "if it ain't broke don't fix it, and if it sells well do nothing new!"
However I have to say, I am EXTREMELY disappointed in their "skill" system. Where is the choice? Where is the variety? You can no longer make your character different, lv up different tree's, to make your barbarian different from some elses barbarian, everything is pre-planned out for you, there's no stats to pump up (Go dex or str? NM, we'll do it for you!).
Plus they took out the necromancer, the classes so far feel "lackluster" to say the least. Barbarian is soooooooo damn boring as a character (at least up to lv 13 in the beta). I miss raising skeleton aormies, or turning into a werewolf as a druid and slaugthering entire waves of enemies in seconds with high DEX.
|
| 22 APR 2012 at 3:03pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4039
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Yeah, I didn't think it was party based, and for me, the top-down viewpoint is mainly to enable you to be able to see your own party members. Otherwise, I can see mobs just fine in a viewpoint like you have in TW or either of the Dragon Age games. Even the NWN2 viewpoint works well in battles, just when you're dungeon crawling that it sucks.
I hated the camera in Sacred 2, btw. In Titan Quest the camera also takes a lot of the immersion away for me.
...but actually it was ok for me in Diablo 1 & 2, because all the graphics in all games sucked in those days, so it didn't matter if your guys are teeny tiny - like the Sword Coast games and Arcanum as well. (Though in the Baldurs Gate games and Arcanum, it's more isometric rather than top- down as much as I've seen on the Diablo 3 vids.)
I'm sorry to hear that they took such a lot of things away.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
