@InquisitorCrox Nintendo have nothing to worry about. Their fanbase is huge and their tech is always unique and innovating. The same can't be said about the Sony and MS.
If the tables were turned and it was MS releasing the new Xbox now and then Sony and Nintendo in a few years, you could say the same about the coming Xbox.
The quicker Nintendo gets its new console out, the quicker its library of games can start to grow and the better it'll be for the system in the long run. The use by date of gaming technology is always going to be a factor as years roll on, but as years roll on gamers get smarter too. A few bad purchases and you quickly realise that newer does not necessarily mean better!
Truth is, Nintendo has a HUGE fan base that most 'hardcore' gamers are unaware of because they look at the gaming world through a tube. Maybe their friends think Nintendo is "uncool" or what not. Their loss.
Nintendo is known for creating gaming experiences that live on years and years in the hearts of their gamers. With my experiences, I can't say the same for Sony and MS, which is why I could care less about their systems, regardless of their specs. And I've owned all three!
@InquisitorCrox It will be compared to the current systems because they are what are out at the moment. People will be expecting it.
It will be out dated in a couple of years? Not necessarily. But everyone will be expecting the next Xbox and PS to be much better than the Wii U just as all are expecting the Wii U to be much better than the current Xbox & PS.
It's a cycle that repeats, and hasn't stopped repeating since console gaming first began.
@elitesoldier117 There was a point in gaming history where every game that was released brought something new to the table, sometimes even creating a new genre. Nowdays it's all rinse, lather, repeat. Franchise this, sequel that. There's not much real creativity coming out of the big developers. I'm sure I've seen this game released in 50 or so different variations in the past 12 years or so.
That gets taken into consideration when scoring a game.
@funkatizingmonk I find that when it's easy it's piss easy. When it's hard, it's bone crunchingly hard. When it flows, fair enough it's addictive, but it's not as entertaining and enjoyable as part 2 is when I open it up, even today, and have a play through.
The addictive quality of it will keep bringing a lot of gamers back until it starts to lose its shine. The game's hook is its loot system. And if you aren't feeble minded, you won't get sucked in.
Though it's still an ok game, it's not much of an aRPG without stat and skill point allocations (for all those who disagree look up where RPG's originated and what systems were involved in those games, here's a hint, google: D&D).
I'm just glad I didn't pay full price. This is more like a Gameloft Diablo game than a Blizzard Diablo.
@cpfast Well look, if you knew you'd really enjoy it and had no hang ups about it you would have justified the price. I bought it because I wanted to see what the new blizzard team had done to the franchise. My feelings about the game are mixed, some good some bad. The fact that you can get D2 really cheap and that has barely any down sides, I still class that as a more superior game.
On the flip side there's Torchlight 2 coming out. It plays different to D3 and more like D2. The music is awesome, the graphics are nice and refreshing (if you don't mind the cartoonish artstyle), character customization is back just as it was in D2 (Yup, runic know what us D2/ARPG fans want!), multiplayer seems rather stable, the online crowd is friendly and more people speak (at least during the beta), it's only $20, plus it's going to be open for modding. If its decent ARPG at an affordable price that you're after, I suggest checking it out. For something a bit more full fledged look into Grim Dawn, though that won't be out for a little while to come.
While playing TL2 online, someone I was playing with brought up something I was thinking recently as I compared D3 to D2. Both D2 and D3 are farely linear games. However D2 felt, at least for me, that it wasn't as bad as D3. And I finally worked out why - it was actually an enjoyable experience to explore. By your 20th play through you knew there wasn't much out there, but it was still enjoyable nonetheless. That same feeling returns with TL2. On the flip side, D3 uses things such as randomly spawning shop keepers and achievements to, for lack of a better word, push you to explore, where as Blizzard North's / Runic Games' titles don't.
@Mr_Mark_Legion Hard to say but my answer is MUCH less people would be playing it, if any at all. The gameplay is super linear more often than not, there is little character customization (most skills are useless), and generates very little desire to be replayed again with the same class... there's just no point. The intricately design to the game operatees just like a pokie / slot machine - every now and then it throws you a bone just to keep you investing your money.. but in this case, your time. It's actually pretty amazig that there haven't been any enquiries or investigations made into games like these.
To me the game is more about grinding for loot more than anything else. It's kind of like a more elaborate iOS game. Though I guess it depends on how you view it.
BludshedX's comments