this topic is pretty retarded tbhabusedbunny

What an intersting first two replies.

Couple things are obvious, both of you are fanboys. Meaning reason and logic most likely are not present due to your Blizzard Bias. The other thing which is obvious is you two dont know the meaning of the word RETROSPECT.

Now when you are done making silly assumptions and are ready to talk like adults...ill be here ready to go over the content in the original post as well as wonder what did happen.

If the information is too inconvenient for your senses, perhaps you should take a break from playing video games as you are taking it a bit too personal.

Just a heads up!

Any idea what happened to Diablo 3 shown in these gameplay demos?

This is in part, a retrospect...a look back at what was marketed and showcased, as well as what as actually delivered as a product.

The Diablo 3 we have now is not the Diablo 3 they are talking about and showcasing in these official videos. One type of game is advertised where as the other, simplified, changed version is what is sold.

First watch this official video:

Diablo 3 Game Play Trailer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtotXRiYimg&feature=related

Video number 2, Crafting:
Voiced by Jay Wilson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIob8wXaQkU

Third video showing Jay during an interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kljUOa40-M&feature=BFa&list=PL5111E43E41B00677

[QUOTE="andyk01"]

I wanto play this game, I enjoyed D1 and D2, but 60 bucks is too much, I will wait for it to be at least 30bucks, I don't care if I have to wait a year, I am still playing Kingdoms of Amalur and Skyrim and having a blast with them, just saying, don't go all beserck on me, is it really worth 60bucks? 

Megotaku77

You can get the diablo 2 battlechest for $15. Also D3 isnt worth the money and its probably NOT going to go down in price any time soon.

[QUOTE="Shiftfallout"] The fallacy of your counter post is that you assume sales connote quality and player satisfaction. A bad game can still sell many copies just as a great game can literally fly under the radar and sell very few. The second problem with your post is that you focus entirely on metacritic's user score when its a tiny offhand observation in my post and ignore everything else. Talk about going off on a tangent!Megotaku77

You claim the fallacy I made is stating that in a capatalistic economic model inside a luxury-item industry is that sales denote player satisfaction.  I refer you here: http://www.amazon.com/Microeconomics-7th-Edition-Robert-Pindyck/dp/0132080230/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1337759297&sr=8-2.  Luxury items sell based on player satisfaction, game developers aren't selling grain or gasoline.  There's no fallacy.  Good games sell, bad games don't.  The only difference is when a good game has bad marketing.  

If you really think terrible games with bad design break sales records and are willing to say that with a straight face and accuse anyone who disagrees with that opinion of being "fallacious" I refer you here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n5E7feJHw0.

[QUOTE="Shiftfallout"] The fallacy of your counter post is that you assume sales connote quality and player satisfaction. A bad game can still sell many copies just as a great game can literally fly under the radar and sell very few. The second problem with your post is that you focus entirely on metacritic's user score when its a tiny offhand observation in my post and ignore everything else. Talk about going off on a tangent!Megotaku77

You claim the fallacy I made is stating that in a capatalistic economic model inside a luxury-item industry is that sales denote player satisfaction.  I refer you here: http://www.amazon.com/Microeconomics-7th-Edition-Robert-Pindyck/dp/0132080230/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1337759297&sr=8-2.  Luxury items sell based on player satisfaction, game developers aren't selling grain or gasoline.  There's no fallacy.  Good games sell, bad games don't.  The only difference is when a good game has bad marketing.  

If you really think terrible games with bad design break sales records and are willing to say that with a straight face and accuse anyone who disagrees with that opinion of being "fallacious" I refer you here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n5E7feJHw0.

irrelevant speculation?
Lets break down my post and lets see what what you try to pass off as "irrelevant speculation".
1. D3 does not have randomly generated worldmaps. (this is not speculation, its fact, backed up by people who published maps of multiple playthroughs. The only randomness is in which limited entrance on a static mesh will be open and which items can be hit for loot are present).  
2. Real randomization is in dungeon layouts, though like D2 they use patterns which an observant player can recognize and know where to go. (also not a speculation, its been backed up with both diagrams and videos on the net.)
3. Cinematics were lagging for people, some barely even watchable. If you read the official forums you will know this was a common issue. I have an average download rate of 3mb a second when obtaining files or downloading clients. People did have issues with the cinematics in the game. This is not debatable its not even speculation, nor is it irrelevant when one rates a game. Nice try.
4. The dvd roms that come with the game are empty except for a 1mb internet client downloader.. This is a fact, not "irrelevant speculation. At this point im not even sure you know what the words mean.
5. Reviewers not always being objective in their reviews and one of the reasons why. This is called an OPINION.  As someone who has recieved both  press and dev E3 passes, I would say my experience & industry work gives me a bit more insight into how it works. Its perfectly reasonable to question my OPINION.
6. The last part of my post is clearly a hypothesis focused around the concept of a blizzard bias. Still no irrelevant speculations to be seen.

I have to question your judgement in this regard.

Now lets look at your post.
1. You say user reviews are a joke and that they either rate as a 1 or a 10. Hmm sounds like speculation to me.
2. You assume that sales connote a good and well appreciated game. Hmm speculation? I pointed out the problem of that kind of logic.
3. You provide a theory that the more popular the game, the lower the reviews from users. Ironic since thats the people that buy and play the product. A theory is something yet to be proven. You assume its true.
4. You suggest that im free to cite megacritic user scores as though it were core of my post, rather than an off hand observation found in a tiny sentence and quickly ignored. Seems like you didnt actually read the post and just picked out something, ran with it and speculated, irrelevantly... that its run by "trolls".
5. Who says I think 0/10 is a reasonable score? I didnt even touch on that, yet you did. Sheesh.  If you click user score by date you see a lot of varied reviews, from 0-10. I see a lot of 5's. That makes sense if you consider the game doesnt run for some people, hacking is rampant right now, exploits which are ruining the AH are present and classes are having their skills removed without a notice or patchnote from Blizzard. No wonder people would be pissed.

I would think my argument still stands. This product is far from perfect and that a blizzard bias exists which people try to confirm, both for and against the product. You yourself try to suggest people hate blizzard and people love blizzard, giving them 0 or 10 ratings, yet then say my hypothesis on this bias is pure irrelevant speculation. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
Furthermore you talk about sales records... I could argue farmville has millions of players but does that make it a great game with good design? The point here is that as time goes on, the audience increases in number. You cant say a game 10 years ago will reach the same amount of people as a game today. There are more gamers every single day, in the past it was a niche market...now the game industry brings in more annual revenue than the film, music and tv industries combined for their primary market.

If you look at say Rift, planes of telara...it sold many copies. How many of those who bought the game are still playing it? Their sub numbers dropped after people got a chance to play it. Games can historically sell a lot, sometimes brand name and IP play a huge role in the purchasing power of the product...doesnt mean its great.

Either way I think right now Diablo 3 is a mess. It is far below the quality Blizzard is known for, it lacks smart design choices and its launch is probably one of the worst in Blizzard history. If you are having fun, all the more power to you. Not everyone is having the same reaction though, and one cannot logically dismiss them as trolls or haters.

[QUOTE="Shiftfallout"]

[QUOTE="Megotaku77"]

I'm not a Diablo 3 fanboy, in fact I'm one of the most critical commentors on Blizzard period, but there's a big difference between Titan Quest and Diablo 3.  Diablo 3 has randomly generated maps, dungeons, and events.  Titan Quest did not.  Replaying Diablo 3 is playing a different game, whereas Titan Quest never changed.  Of course the maps were bigger, they were the same maps... over and over and over.  

Did you play Diablo 2?  Balance was never the name of the game.  I could 1-shot hell mode Baal with my Bone Necro and I was the only class that could reliably solo hell mode because mobs almost never spawn Magic immune (every other element yes, Magic no) and my bone walls had hundreds of thousands of health points allowing me to box in and forget any mob that was magic immune.

If your cinematics are lagging its because you haven't fully downloaded the game.  Even in the green download section its downloading cinematics, they're loaded last.  So yes, you were streaming the cinematics and that's why they were lagging.  I had lagging cinematics until I let the game fully download and restarted my computer.  

Saying this game deserves a 5 or "they're on Blizzard's payroll" is laughable.  The games already averaging 88% on Metacritic, so you can expect a 9.0 from Gamespot.

Megotaku77

For starters, D3 does not have randomly generated maps. IN fact most are the same with the only differences being breakable objects placed in different areas. The real randomization is found in the dungeons, however like Diablo 2 you see similar patterns which nearly always link to another piece which if you know what to look for is next to your goal, it eventually does take away from true randomness.

Secondly, cinematics were lagging for people even with a fully downloaded game...ironically in my case i had the game dvd in my cd rom which would be great for cinematics to play from...but oh wait, the dvd blizzard ships is empty except for a 1mb exe which downloads the game from the internet.

The professional reviewers will probably give the game a high review, player scores are generally much lower. Metacritic lists the sum as a 4/10 based on user scores. Dont forget, reviewers who do it for a publication for a living are not always the most objectively based. A bad review, even if the game deserves it, can come back to haunt you. Its a small industry and if you get on a publishers bad list, it can be felt far and wide.

I would bet that if Blizzard sold the IP to another company, maybe one with a bad trackrecord, and they produced this exact game...the reviews would be far worse. The fact is theres a blizzard bias at play.

Metacritic player reviews are a joke.  Players typically have 2 rankings: 1 and 10.  Let's go through the best selling games this year: 

Mass Effect 3 - 4.0

Assassin's Creed Revelations - 6.8

Modern Warefare 3 - 2.2

The Old Republic - 5.7

Do these games actually deserve these reviews?  Here's the question then: why is it the more popular a game is, the lower the score?  Battlefield 3 is currently averaging 7.3 and it failed hard enough to affect EA's stock prices (its literally listed as the primary reason of stock loss in the recent investor's call).  The reviews don't even come close to reflecting the performance of the game in sales.  I guess us players just love playing terrible games!  Feel free to cite metacritic player reviews, but its a joke I don't know why they don't just close down their player review sections because its just a bunch of forum trolls.

No seriously, look up Metacritic for D3 player reviews by negative reviews.  The highest review in the first 30 hits was 2/10 with more than 90% being a 0/10.  Seriously?  0/10?  You can dislike the game as much as you want, but you're living in a different reality if you think 0/10 is reasonable.  

I'm not a Diablo 3 fanboy, in fact I'm one of the most critical commentors on Blizzard period, but there's a big difference between Titan Quest and Diablo 3.  Diablo 3 has randomly generated maps, dungeons, and events.  Titan Quest did not.  Replaying Diablo 3 is playing a different game, whereas Titan Quest never changed.  Of course the maps were bigger, they were the same maps... over and over and over.  

Did you play Diablo 2?  Balance was never the name of the game.  I could 1-shot hell mode Baal with my Bone Necro and I was the only class that could reliably solo hell mode because mobs almost never spawn Magic immune (every other element yes, Magic no) and my bone walls had hundreds of thousands of health points allowing me to box in and forget any mob that was magic immune.

If your cinematics are lagging its because you haven't fully downloaded the game.  Even in the green download section its downloading cinematics, they're loaded last.  So yes, you were streaming the cinematics and that's why they were lagging.  I had lagging cinematics until I let the game fully download and restarted my computer.  

Saying this game deserves a 5 or "they're on Blizzard's payroll" is laughable.  The games already averaging 88% on Metacritic, so you can expect a 9.0 from Gamespot.

Megotaku77

For starters, D3 does not have randomly generated maps. IN fact most are the same with the only differences being breakable objects placed in different areas. The real randomization is found in the dungeons, however like Diablo 2 you see similar patterns which nearly always link to another piece which if you know what to look for is next to your goal, it eventually does take away from true randomness.

Secondly, cinematics were lagging for people even with a fully downloaded game...ironically in my case i had the game dvd in my cd rom which would be great for cinematics to play from...but oh wait, the dvd blizzard ships is empty except for a 1mb exe which downloads the game from the internet.

The professional reviewers will probably give the game a high review, player scores are generally much lower. Metacritic lists the sum as a 4/10 based on user scores. Dont forget, reviewers who do it for a publication for a living are not always the most objectively based. A bad review, even if the game deserves it, can come back to haunt you. Its a small industry and if you get on a publishers bad list, it can be felt far and wide.

I would bet that if Blizzard sold the IP to another company, maybe one with a bad trackrecord, and they produced this exact game...the reviews would be far worse. The fact is theres a blizzard bias at play.

takes about 15 hours to beat it on normal. you'll be around level 30 when you beat it. max level is 60. you'll probably want to beat it more times because when you're level 30, you still haven't unlocked many things for your character. if you like the other classes you could beat the game with all characters. there are a lot of difficulty levels too.rock_solid

Once you beat the game, which was very very easy with a wizard. (pop crystal armor which reduces cost of spells, and use laser beams to kill anything that moves in a matter of seconds).

You are given the choice to do it all over again only this time the enemies have more hp and hit harder, at this point you wont find as many rare or legendary drops, if any at all. By the time you beat the game again, you get to yes...replay it another time. Same thing. Beat it? then you get to do it again! In short, their attempt at replayability and game play extension comes in the form of making you do the same thing over and over again with little to no reward. All they do is try to slow your pace. Sloppy design if you ever see it.