Diablo III release date

Skreshavik wrote:

Oh, well it seems...strange to bash someone else for their tastes?

Not really. It's not even a matter of taste with stuff like this. It's like buying stuff from EA or Activision, boycotting D3 is politics. The fact that I didn't enjoy the beta is the icing on the cake, there's n way in hell I'm funding something so overpriced and riddled with bad business practices.

Oh, gotcha, even though I don't understand what the exact issue is.

DRM and the high price in this case. The direction of the game itself is just taste, and not something I care about. Seriously though, those are some of the shittiest graphics I've seen all year.

Here's the thing: people still don't think that, say...pre-ordering is a bad thing. But it is. Every time you pre-order a game, you're damaging the industry. Just like if you go on IGN or Kotaku you're damaging the industry. People say 'it's just a game, it's just entertainment', but you don't get shit like this in music or film. The vidya industry is fucking awful, and consumers really need to start voting with their wallets in a meaningful way.

The price I can agree with. Not as bad as EA (wtf are they taxing online transactions for?,) yet still expensive. The DRM is...not bad? I have it on my Battle.net account (just like steam,) so I don't see any issues with it. The lack of true singleplayer is disappointing, but I can manage with that, and get an emulator-type server at the absolute worse.

How is pre-ordering damaging the industry? How is IGN/Kotaku/(metacritic?) damaging the industry?

Pre-ordering puts money into the hands of publishers before the worth of their product can be proved one way or the other. You are rewarding them before they have completed a service. Pre-order incentives like all that visual shit for every major release these days is designed to do just this - get money out of people before you have to deliver the goods.

IGN and other major gaming news sites have no objectivity; they're not free from bias and never can be while they happily advertise for publishers. Loads of sites were plastered with ads for ME3 before it came out, and it's the same story for every AAA release. Plenty of reviews from these sites are flat-out bought by the publishers. That episode with the guy from Gamespot giving Kane and Lynch a lousy score and then being fired is a good example, but there are plenty of others. At the very least, big game sites are heavily incentivised to stay on the good side of publishers and devs, so their coverage is worth pretty much fuck all.

And if you go to their websites, you give that site hits, which affects how much they can get for ads, which gives them more money. They should not be getting more money.

Alyss wrote:

Pre-ordering puts money into the hands of publishers before the worth of their product can be proved one way or the other. You are rewarding them before they have completed a service. Pre-order incentives like all that visual shit for every major release these days is designed to do just this - get money out of people before you have to deliver the goods.

IGN and other major gaming news sites have no objectivity; they're not free from bias and never can be while they happily advertise for publishers. Loads of sites were plastered with ads for ME3 before it came out, and it's the same story for every AAA release. Plenty of reviews from these sites are flat-out bought by the publishers. That episode with the guy from Gamespot giving Kane and Lynch a lousy score and then being fired is a good example, but there are plenty of others. At the very least, big game sites are heavily incentivised to stay on the good side of publishers and devs, so their coverage is worth pretty much fuck all.

And if you go to their websites, you give that site hits, which affects how much they can get for ads, which gives them more money. They should not be getting more money.

Well put

Heh, ala CoD:BO2, yes?

I've never seen a gross intrusion regarding IGN or w/e, as everyone has their own bias. Personally, I blame the customer more than the reviewer due to the fact you should look at multiple reviews and ask people than dropping $60 dollars on a piece of plastic with a lease. And if you don't judge it worth your money, wait for the inevitable price drop.

It's basic consumerism. Every product I've seen is "the best according to X." Everyone knows it's bullshit regardless of whatever backing. No harm in taking some responsibility.

Barbarians are so far the worst class I've seen. Demon hunters too - at first I was under the impression that DH were beasts but that's only in a group. Soon as they head off on their own, they're crap. They kill fast but I've seen them get raped by fallens. Monk is beyond OP. WD I've seen good things and bad things, mine personally sucks but that was probably just my layout since it was my first char.

My barb build: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/barbarian#WkRXVg!bVX!YbbacZ

Those skills coupled with 158 life per hit, 650 life per second and 36k life, I almost never die. Only particularly vicious champion combos like frozen, arcane and fire chain fuck my shit up.

And still doing a halfway decent 2800 dps with nothing but defensive abilities.

Vampiric + extra fast PISSES me off. I have real low damage but high health and 3 healing abilities + potions. So I built a tank basically with very low damage. If I get vampirics, I can usually kill them without a problem. But if they're Vampiric and Fast, or Vampiric and X other difficult trait like molten or fire chain or vortex, they heal faster than I can damage them on my own.

I'm still only in NM... got to A4 with the new Monk. Should get hell tomorrow.

Skreshavik wrote:

Heh, ala CoD:BO2, yes?

I've never seen a gross intrusion regarding IGN or w/e, as everyone has their own bias. Personally, I blame the customer more than the reviewer due to the fact you should look at multiple reviews and ask people than dropping $60 dollars on a piece of plastic with a lease. And if you don't judge it worth your money, wait for the inevitable price drop.

It's basic consumerism. Every product I've seen is "the best according to X." Everyone knows it's bullshit regardless of whatever backing. No harm in taking some responsibility.

But IGN, primarily, is a reviewing site. Yet they advertise the games they are reviewing. Do you not see some bias there? How are they going to give an honest review of ME3 if they're being bankrolled by EA? Dragon Age 2 was received with massive negativity by the gaming public, yet got the complete opposite from major reviewers.

Does this crap happen with film reviewers? Book reviewers? Hell no.

/facepalm

EVERYONE is biased Alyss... EVERYONE on EVERYTHING.

You can't help it. It is literally impossible to be fully objectionable as everything that enters your tiny lil brain goes through your own perception filters.

There are a lot of problems with the gaming industry... yes. Does it matter? not really.

And also LO-Fuckin-L if you think the movie industry is in ANY better shape Nothing but a constant stream of steaming shit is ever released anymore.

Mass Markets. The REAL culprit.

Go indie or just stfu already.

Avatar immediately springs to mind. What's so great about it? No ramp-up time between what the planet is and those half-breeds, just "ok there are these hostile natives, but it's a good thing we have these bodies we'll randomly bring up in the next scene to skip over that problem."
There was that bondage thing with the flying kites. "Ohh, you'll be BFF's forever and ever." Then out of fucking nowhere it disappears after he finds the king kite.

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/avatar/critic-reviews

Look at that shit. 100's everywhere? Fuck.

I tot avuhter wuz a gud movee

1 more thing....

big "review" sites are obviously biased yada yada, but that doesn't leave them without purpose.

Publishers use them for feeding out game info.

If you can't separate biased opinions from actual game facts... then that's on the reader.

Fuck, why does ANYONE ever take anyone elses OPINION for anything but just that? I certainly never put any weight to them. That's why they're fucking opinions.

Where's Gnarly at? I'm sure he's got some BS reason why marketing and ad sales of the same product being reviewed is actually beneficial

Book reviewers are extremely biased... Half of those guys are failed writers. The other half are bookworms and fanboys of certain authors. If a book reviewer has a drink with a famous author, that book reviewer is never gonna say a bad word about that author again. Most authors aren't elusive. They're easy to get in touch with.

RoninHo'in wrote:

Where's Gnarly at? I'm sure he's got some BS reason why marketing and ad sales of the same product being reviewed is actually beneficial

I might, but I'm confused as to what you are asking.

marketing and ad sales? So as to why paid "good" reviews and ad sales together are beneficial?

Overall, I am in the camp of true transparency in marketing (or at least simulated transparency hehe), again like I said, clarify?

I was kinda jus pokin fun and not actually looking for an answer cause I don't think there is one.

At the same time, I don't thin IGNorant are really lying all that much. I think they really do have the excitement for the shovelware that they profusely support.

All in all, I always take ANY reviewers/journalists word with a grain of salt. Why would I ever trust their opinion over my own? How can anyone be so unsure of their own opinion that they can't blatantly see how & where their opinion would differ from the reviewers?

I don't ever put stock in reviewers. My dad's one of those people who only listens to music if it gets 4+ stars, only watches movies if they come highly recommended by reviewers and are seen as "intellectual" rather than just fun fodder. Lots of my favorite movies got panned, lots of my favorite artists technically blow cock at music.

But you have to admit with games it's usually spot on. RDR, GTA, Diablo 3, etc. Diablo 1 and 2 also got great reviews and were also great games. Same with Baldur's Gate, LA Noire, and a dozen other great games. Great reviews, lots of hype. Skyrim. etc. Honestly, reviewers are pretty damn good at judging games.

Most reviews I obviously take with a grain of salt, however rockpapershotgun is one blog/review site I highly value, and may even occasionally base purchases on.

Well I don't trust reviewers either...I just pirate stuff and see if I like it...but gaming journalism is more than just reviews. And the big sites are in the publishers pockets.

Plus: D3 is shit, and not at all a good example of reviewers getting it right.

Not relevant, but damn I miss the old IGN. I can't fucking navigate through this shit...mustn't...rage...fucking...phallusi...

D3 gets better and better as you get deeper into Inferno and really have to struggle and make every piece of gear count. I'm a multimillionaire in terms of IGG now and I keep making a colossal amount of gold on the AH, some big sales but dozens of little sales for 20-50k. All these people are retarded and don't know how economies work... I'm owning. My monk blows though.

finally got D3. Battletag is Halalaka#2132 if anyones interested.

Eradicated wrote:

finally got D3. Battletag is Halalaka#2132 if anyones interested.

No