I'm guessing you won't need a constant internet connection to play. :-) I'm cheering them on. Sick of big studios and their greed.attirex

and there won't be stupid weapon auction houses too!!

I am ready.

for the people defending the online garbage, I have some questions here I would like to be answered

1.- is diablo 3 a persistent world? (I'm a assuming no)

2.- does diablo 3 have a huge expansive world ala WoW, GW (yeah, it was instanced based, but the world itself was big enough), Conan, ToR, Lineage 2?

3.- is diablo 3 comprised of chapters until the game finishes? (I'm assuming yes, much like Diablo 2)

4.- does the game HAS AN ENDING? (I'm obviously assuming yes)

5.- is diablo 3 "session based"? (in which you go with a couple of friends thru chapters killing stuff?, I'm assuming yes, much like Diablo 2 was)

if the answers are the ones I'm assuming, then I have another question

1.- why THE HELL, would you compare Diablo 3 with persistent MMORPGS like WoW and GW? and WHY THE HELL would you see the need to be 24/7 in online mode when not even the freaking world is persistent, has an ending, is neither expansive nor huge to begin with?

THIS is intended for stuff like WoW or mmorpgs in general, a game that weights the ammount of a Small Hard drive and the world it's so incredibly Huge, have so many instances and raids that exploring and doing all of it completely alone it's the work a group of people or a madman or outright impossible?, when DIABLO-like games consisted of your character against the miriad of monster and finishing the game by yourself? the group of people was not something that was needed because you could sit there one night and just you know...go kill stuff by yourself if you wanted to, along with the deep item/skill customization and the plettora of things

did you all know that Diablo 1 was the epithome of games like these and not one single time you needed to be online to do ANYTHING?, and the reason the phrase "diablo like games" was coined was because of it?, seriously guys, just think it through for a momment and realize why 24/7 online requirement to play single player mode it's completely ridiculous and even more so in a game like this

Vlashkgbr

I know. It's pretty sad. But hey, the defense force will find a way to refute you. I don't give a flying crap about playing online with other people, that's why I enjoyed

torchlight, titan quest and freaking sacred. But if a company wants me to pay 60 bucks for a non mmo game that requires a persistent online connection just to play single player........no way. No matter how good the game is. You can argue that diablo is best played online and such, don't care. It's got a single player mode and that's the sole reason I got the first 2 games.

2011 or not, it's one thing to be connected all the time to play an mmo, but it's another thing for a non mmo game without a persistent world. I played d2 to the end without ever touching the multi. Why? Because I could. Anywhere, anytime, I could enjoy the setting and loot hunting without dealing with super-nerds online.

Do people's connections never go down? Do people never travel? Do people not have bandwidth caps? It is pretty astounding that so many people are cool with this now that it's Blizzard doing it.guynamedbilly

sad isn't it. Another company and all hell breaks loose.

sigh, another poster feeling jelly and buyer's remorse

yep, grim dawn and torchlight 2 for me. Diablo 3 will be good no doubt, but click and loot games are not in my top five genre.

I love pc gaming, but damn if it's not filled with the most hypocrisy I've ever come across.

[QUOTE="malebog123"]

you call always rely on the blizzard defense force like some sycophants here believe that all that blizzard touches is gold. If blizzard craps into a game case and called it a game, you can sure bet on the defense force to defend the mighty pure name that is blizzard.

Well then again : that's just like............ my opinion man.

When ubisoft pulled this crap, this forum was on fire, with down with ubi! die ubi!

The sad thing is, I recognize the same posters here defending blizzard, while condemning ubi back then.

Thankfully, there's grim dawn and Torchlight 2 for my clickfest fix.

XaosII

There were absolutely no benefits to Ubi doing so. There are benefits for Blizzard to do so for Diablo 3. if you don't think those benefits outweigh the costs, then thats fine, and a legitimate complaint. But Blizzard's actions are far from meritless whereas Ubisoft's wer.

Yes and no. How do you know that ubi did not benefit from their crap. I don't support ubi, but again their games are thier games. It's their right to use whatever drm they want no matter how full of crap it is.

Blizzard's doing the same, but in a whole different manner, but the end game is still the same. I like games, but no company pays me to defend whatver crap they come up with, no matter how they sugarcoat it.

I can't speak for everyone, but I sure as hell did not play much of d2 online. I enjoyed the story (was'nt epic but the style and atmosphere drew me in). But I won't support a game that requires a persisent internet just to do a solo game.

you call always rely on the blizzard defense force like some sycophants here believe that all that blizzard touches is gold. If blizzard craps into a game case and called it a game, you can sure bet on the defense force to defend the mighty pure name that is blizzard.

Well then again : that's just like............ my opinion man.

When ubisoft pulled this crap, this forum was on fire, with down with ubi! die ubi!

The sad thing is, I recognize the same posters here defending blizzard, while condemning ubi back then.

call us whiners, or whatever, but I will not defend crap like this no matter the company. No one pays me to be a fanboy.

Thankfully, there's grim dawn and Torchlight 2 for my clickfest fix.

the powers of the Thread Necromancers!

Just finished Witcher 1 this afternoon and it was a really good game. I can see why people on this forum always spoke highly of it. At this point I am considering going for the sequel right away but had some questions for how they improved the gameplay or if it is the same.

Specifically, I thought the traveling was extremely tedious in Witcher 1. My left hand got so damn sore from constantly holding down the W key during several hour play sessions. Have the improved this? Also, the combat system was OK in Witcher 1, but i didnt think it was very interesting. How is the combat different or is it the same? I guess another very minor concern is the whole loot issue. I found that 90% of the loot I picked up in the game was completely useless and ended up being a big waste of time.

mkaliaz

Witcher 2 points :

1-no more tedious backtracking and pointless walking around. Fun to explore the environs

2-Much much much better loot. You can find weapons (that actually work now), armor, daggers, diagrams to craft weapons e.t.c

3-combat is much better, but it requires some practice to get the hang of it. YOU MUST USE EVERY ITEM/POWERS AT YOUR DISPOSAL TO WIN FIGHTS

4-meaningful side quests

5-DAT GRAPHICS!

6-DAT TRISS

7-WIN