×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The State of the Diablo 3 Beta (Two Videos)

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the stay-awhile-and-listen dept.

Emulation (Games) 237

It's been almost four years since Diablo 3 was announced, and its development began years earlier. Its predecessors helped define the action RPG genre, so anticipation is high among fans of the franchise. The game has undergone closed beta testing since September, and a lot has changed since then. Now that Blizzard has settled on May 15th as a release date, we thought this would be a good time to take a look at the state of the game as it currently exists. These two videos show actual gameplay of the various classes, explain the skill and rune systems, take a look at the auction house, and go over many of the other changes since the beginning of development. (Click to play the first video, and the second one will play automagically after the first one ends.)

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

237 comments

Yeah but does it work on Linux? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570085)

Didn't think so, therefore I'm not interested. Linux defines who I am.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (1)

Eraesr (1629799) | about 2 years ago | (#39570097)

So you're cheap?

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570155)

If refusing to pay for a sequence of bits is considered cheap, then yes, by all means, call me cheap.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570191)

So by that level of thinking paying 20k for a chunk of metal fashioned into a car is unreasonable?

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570211)

I never said I would pay "20k for a chunk of metal fashioned into a car" either.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570235)

So by that level of thinking paying 20k for a chunk of metal fashioned into a car is unreasonable?

When we have Star Trek style replicators that can instantly materialize an endless number of perfect car copies for essentially no cost, then yes it will be.

Unlike data the scarcity of automobiles is not artificial. You need materials, engineering, and labor to make each car.

In summary, you're an idiot and you will remain an idiot for as long as you talk about things you clearly don't understand. That's what idiots do.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570291)

Trolling hard today, I see ...

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (1)

Gideon Wells (1412675) | about 2 years ago | (#39570427)

Trolls work on the myth/legend system. They work because in the back of your mind you know people who believe that.

There are people I know who are so cheap that they attempted to use a slice of PVC pipe for their wedding ring because they feel jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones. Not that different than people who feel organized bits are a racket. In the eyes of the company, he is the best procurement employee they've ever had.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (5, Funny)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#39570929)

There are people I know who are so cheap that they attempted to use a slice of PVC pipe for their wedding ring because they feel jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones.

The weird thing is, they're right. The jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones. How is it that they're smart enough to figure that out, but not smart enough to realize that replacing it with plastic is even stupider?

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (4, Insightful)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#39570423)

So computer programs appear out of thin air? They don't require programmers, artists or project managers? With automobiles, there's heavy costs on both design and production. With software, almost all of the cost is shifted to design... but there's still significant cost that needs to be recouped.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (5, Insightful)

Courageous (228506) | about 2 years ago | (#39570957)

The initial version, patches, support, and other infrastructure are all labor that go into making the software. In additions to all this, there are fringe costs, such as the building, power, computers, administrative support, social security fees, and so forth. The fact that the marginal cost of production is zero is neither here nor there. Investments must be recouped, or there will be no investments to speak of.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (5, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 2 years ago | (#39570363)

That is the stupidest comment I have ever read.
You know these companies that make software, they have staff, they are not going to work for free because they need to pay for food, shelter, travel, fuel, health care, entertainment, education and save some up for an emergency, For themselves and often for other dependents as well. These people are good at "sequencing bits" in new original ways, when executed on a computer that will give entertainment to others. You are not paying for the bits you are paying for the work to make it. Well if you think about it you are probably more likely paying for them to work on their next project.

Standard GNU methods of making profit doesn't work too well with games.
1. You are not going to charge for consulting. If the game needs a consultant they wont play it.
2. If you are not going to charge for support. They just won't pay for it.
3. You could sell add ons. However you need to be careful as those add ons may break the GNU.
4. You package the game on a piece of hardware. Which may work... However after they get the source there will be a PC version soon and they will no longer need your hardware.

Sorry but the GNU model doesn't lead itself for a market of developers. if all software was GNU then Programming will be strictly a part-time/hobby thing and quality will go down the toilet because in order to make money they will need other full time jobs with a different discipline and less people willing to study computer science.
       

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (1, Flamebait)

DigiShaman (671371) | about 2 years ago | (#39570895)

You're logic files in the face of idealism. Damn freeloaders need to be put in their place. Bunch of knuckleheads around here, I swear.

As for the rest of you. You don't want pay for a product. Fine. I get that. But don't steal. If it's not yours, hands OFF! Go pick up an OSS game if you're that idealistic.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39571009)

Exactly. Its disturbing how many pirates only listen to the parts of OSS that they want to hear and ignore the parts they don't. Interestingly enough, the parts they always want to listen to is "free" and the parts they always want to ignore is "money."

Stealing is taking anything to which you are not legally entitled. Piracy is just another form of theft. And before some moronic blow hard jumps in like a three year old child trying to correct an adult, there are many different types of theft in most law around the world. Its just that each type of theft has its own classification and legal requirements. Piracy is just one of many different types of theft.

Honestly, the sheer stupidity of pirates is simply amazing. They will rationalize anything so as to justify their criminal activity.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (4, Informative)

beaverdownunder (1822050) | about 2 years ago | (#39571065)

First off, not all linux applications need to follow the GNU. You can distribute a linux application with any license you please -- it may hinder repository access with particular distributions, but there's nothing stopping you from creating your own application manager, putting THAT in the repository, and then using that to distribute your games. Just saying.

Second, freemium is how it's all going to be in a decade full stop. You might as well get on that wagon now. And GNOME and KDE are almost to the point where Grandma can be trained to use it just as easily as Windows, which is the benchmark I tend to use when I consider the emerging market for a particular operating system. So, I expect that in another decade, there'll be a fair whack of linux machines with a fair whack of non-nerd users.

Finally, why you'd write anything in any language you can't cross-compile without great expense or redevelopment I just don't understand.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (2)

paulatz (744216) | about 2 years ago | (#39570187)

So you're cheap?

Digital media is like love, in that you can give it away without ever running out of it.

So I guess, you are cheap if you don't pay for love

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (5, Insightful)

Troyusrex (2446430) | about 2 years ago | (#39570251)

Digital media is like love, in that you can give it away without ever running out of it.

Digital Media is also like love in that you can't eat it (insert 'witty' innuendo here). Media makers like to eat and giving it away free isn't conducive to the goal of feeding oneself.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (3, Informative)

paulatz (744216) | about 2 years ago | (#39570861)

If I'm not going to buy it, you're not going to eat in any case

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570945)

Can't eat it, but sure can swallow it. Yummy!

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570691)

Great, but the people making the digital media have bills to pay. Unlike you, they don't have mommy and daddy paying their way.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (3, Interesting)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#39570117)

It's kind of sad that you're defined by an operating system. Reminds me a bit of the Amish. Their level of technology is a big part of who they are, so they go without modern conveniences (including video games) just to stick to that. All fine and dandy, but you don't hear the Amish complaining that nobody makes spoilers compatible with their buggies because it's a lifestyle choice.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (5, Funny)

jkovacik (208785) | about 2 years ago | (#39570305)

Actually, there's a huge thread on that very subject in the Amish Buggy Customization forum, but since the responses are carved on a rock out in a field in PA, you probably missed it.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (1)

causality (777677) | about 2 years ago | (#39570325)

It's kind of sad that you're defined by an operating system. Reminds me a bit of the Amish.

If you keep talking about the Amish that way, you're going to offend them and they'll stop visiting Slashdot! You insensitive clod...

All fine and dandy, but you don't hear the Amish complaining that nobody makes spoilers compatible with their buggies because it's a lifestyle choice.

It's much harder to entertain that asinine entitlement mentality when eating fried chicken means going to the coop and wringing its neck yourself*. If for some reason they thought aerodynamic lift was a problem for their buggies and wanted a spoiler, they'd make one themselves.


* What I really appreciate are people who can enjoy modern conveniences without becoming soft, complacent and fat because of them. It requires this thing that was once called "values" before politicians destroyed any meaning this term had. It could also be called having principles.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (4, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 2 years ago | (#39570813)

It's much harder to entertain that asinine entitlement mentality when eating fried chicken means going to the coop and wringing its neck yourself*

Now, I have a few Mennonite friends who've explained this to me, and from my understanding, this is exactly the point. Religion aside, the Amish culture values hard work, cooperation, and human interaction above worldly things like material goods, entertainment, and wealth. Putting in a good day's work to produce something is valued more in their society than coming home to a store-bought meal and the latest TV show.

In that way, Linux fans are much like the Amish. Open-source developers often contribute not for money, but for the pride in having contributed to a larger goal. Sure, there are some who sell their open code to earn money, just as there are Amish who have cars, phones, and radios to interact with the world outside their hometown.

It is the ideals we live by, not the technology we use, that truly defines who we are. Linux embodies a certain set of ideals, that the OP claims to live by.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (3, Insightful)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#39571089)

I've heard of a few Mennonite cultures that allow them to work at call centers and the like (their use of technology is accepted as its part of earning a living) and the supervisors love them because they work very hard, take pride in doing a good job and never complain. My only complaint is that they let their kids play in the road far too much, I've almost hit a few of them on blind curves and hills when traveling through the backwoods.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (2)

thesandtiger (819476) | about 2 years ago | (#39571159)

Actually, that's not really how the Amish relationship with technology works. They don't eschew technology because it is technology, but rather they eschew some technology because they feel it doesn't facilitate community/interpersonal relationships with people or a relationship with god, or, even if it does, in some cases the disadvantages are not worth it. When technology doesn't impinge on those things and if it is sufficiently needful they use it.

I met an Amish who owns a computer and uses a cellphone for his work. Doesn't have them in his home, doesn't carry the phone with him all the time, but he uses them.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (2)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | about 2 years ago | (#39570149)

Didn't think so, therefore I'm not interested.

It runs on the PS3, and the PS3 (sort of) runs Linux.

*ducks*

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (4, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 2 years ago | (#39570263)

Companies in the past have tried selling games for Linux. Including some big titles. However here are some estimates
1. Linux use for the desktop is at around 1%
2. 25% of that 1% are Open Source Zealots who will not pay for a program that isn't open source.
3. 25% of that 1% are just too cheap to buy software.
4. 25% of what is left isn't interested in games.
5. 15% Will just Duel Boot/Virtualize/Wine to play the Windows version of the game.
Leaving 10% of that 1% (0.1%) of sales. Of the product. Is that worth having to program a port, have support trained, and testing and bug fixing for that platform?

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (4, Interesting)

unapersson (38207) | about 2 years ago | (#39570303)

Where do the Humble Bundle stats fit in with your assertions?

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (5, Insightful)

Tyler Eaves (344284) | about 2 years ago | (#39570345)

Nowhere, if he's interested in actual market research, rather than a publicity stunt.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39571093)

This man more or less has the right of it. Without sales data from regular (i.e. non-Humble Bundle) games, it's kind of impossible to tell, but the Humble Bundle strikes me as a serious statistical outlier.

1) Some or all of the proceeds go to charity.
2) The sales totals are published right there on the page, making it a great place for Linux lovers to make a case that Linux users will pay for games.
3) It's DRM free.
4) It's a bunch of independent game makers, which adds another crusade-style cause to the sales and probably skews the market more than a little bit.

The Humble Indie Bundles probably say something positive about Linux gamers, but I'm not sure that they say that there's really, truly a big potential market there for major PC game developers.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (3, Interesting)

ifrag (984323) | about 2 years ago | (#39570329)

Is that worth having to program a port, have support trained, and testing and bug fixing for that platform?

Probably not, although Blizzard has stated before that having a Mac port of their games has sometimes helped fixed bugs in the Windows version as well. Blizzard also has a habit of making dual DirectX and OpenGL rendering engines, so they probably are closer than most other companies would be to making a port.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (4, Insightful)

Yosho (135835) | about 2 years ago | (#39570785)

It's a shame that numbers you've made up off the top of your head are meaningless, especially when youre entire argument is based on them.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#39571039)

Other than the 1% desktop Linux estimate, the rest of your comment is pure speculation on your part. And a bit of flamebaiting as well.

Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39571201)

1. Linux use for the desktop is at around 1%

No. Even those who don't want to admit Linux has a desktop presence typically quote 2%. We know 2% is the lower bound. Factually, the number has consistently trailed that of Apple's OSX. Which is to say, right around 5%-6%.

Now the trick is, how many of those desktops have the video and muscle to play a specific game in question. The answer is, no one knows.

The rest of your argument is pretty true. Interestingly enough, 1 and 2 combine to pirate software and then these guys will complain that no one supports their platform. Oh the irony of stupidity which prevails amongst pirates.

The real state of Diablo III (5, Insightful)

Totenglocke (1291680) | about 2 years ago | (#39570099)

The real state of Diablo III is that is has DRM forcing you to be online even to play single player. As a result, my almost two decade long love affair with Blizzard games has come to an end.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570127)

Same goes for the Starcraft 2 campaign. And it's even worse than that, you can't even play it when Battlenet is down.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (3, Interesting)

16Chapel (998683) | about 2 years ago | (#39570699)

Not true - when Battle.net is down you can still play, you just don't get any awards / medals / unlockable things.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570847)

Not true - when Battle.net is down you can still play, you just don't get any awards / medals / unlockable things.

You would think that because SC2 is like that... but unless you provide a good citation, my opinion is that D3 is like WOW, where the game logic *IS* in the server [as it seems on the reverse engineering that has been happening on the game communication with battlenet servers]. So if you are not connected, it is impossible to play (or crack) the game. Of course, until a cracked server leaks like it happened in WOW.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (3, Insightful)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#39570139)

This is basically my thought on it as well. Loved Diablo and Diablo II, but my wireless is a little flaky because of my apartment's layout so the only multiplayer that works well is on the LAN. I'd be ok with an online activation. I'd tolerate it checking in once a week or once a month. But I don't want to have to spend a half hour fudging around with the wireless signal every time I want to play an offline game.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570421)

But I don't want to have to spend a half hour fudging around with the wireless signal every time I want to play an offline game.

Not even that, what happens in 5-10 years when you want to dig up the game and play it again?
Will the servers still be online? Will there be a "required" patch which doesn't work well with your system or nerfs your favorite character?

Re:The real state of Diablo III (3, Insightful)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about 2 years ago | (#39570609)

Not even that, what happens in 5-10 years when you want to dig up the game and play it again? Will the servers still be online? Will there be a "required" patch which doesn't work well with your system or nerfs your favorite character?

Blizzard is actually the one company that I feel I can trust to keep the servers running for a lon gperiod of time, becuase they tend to stick with and support their games. They seem to have a corporate mindset that looks and plans in the long term, as opposed to most other publishers that just look to the next game and leave just a token force to maintain a previous game. That being said, I really enjoyed Diablo II, but after being disappointed with SC2, I do not expect to buy D3 any time soon.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (5, Informative)

Y2KDragon (525979) | about 2 years ago | (#39570707)

On a whim, I dug out my old Diablo II and Lord of Darkness disks. Registering my game on their BattleNet site was easy, and was given new "in game" keys for downloading the client, with patches. Sure, the graphics don't look so good, but I can play. And the online servers are still there, allowing people to play the full-featured game, with all the benefits of the network. If being connected on-line is going to be required to play for Diablo III, Blizzard has shown that they will make sure that the game is available.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

thesandtiger (819476) | about 2 years ago | (#39570961)

I think that rather than plan to keep the servers up forever, I could see them release a patch that would allow LAN play if it were true that they had to close down for some reason" or, failing that, to at least patch it to remove the must be online part.

Blizzard has by and large done alright by me - I don't like the drm they are using now but they are the one studio that releases and supports their games well enough for me to put up with it.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#39571059)

My only complaint with Blizzard's implementation of Diablo 2 is that each patch (especially after 1.07 or so) drastically changed gameplay. Suddenly great sets were crap, great characters were crap, etc. Sure, it adds a level of replayability, but if I have a lvl 60 on its way to greatness, I don't want to trash it and start over on the Blood Moore with a new character.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#39571075)

My experience with Wotlk expansion says otherwise. When a new patch rolled out, it was unbearable to play. The server would go down while we in the middle of a boss fight. A few hours later you could log back in and get instantly pwned by the boss. Talking to some veterans, it happened back in the days of vanilla WoW a few times but it seemed to have been corrected. Apparently not.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570183)

Not to mention what this does to the mod community...or lag-free LAN play in other parts of the world that aren't the centre of the known universe like the US...or charging us $25 more down under for *exactly* the same digital product/delivery...or the entire real currency based greed shop they've created...or the consolitis dumbing down of what made the entire 1st two games so great - the *limitations* & inherent replayability that created in the game with the skill system the way it was.

I could go on & on...suffice it to say they've added BullshitNet2 to the equation & some semi-3D eye candy & catered to the (s)lowest common denominator. That's it. Game over. RIP Diablo.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570241)

Not sure who in their right mind would pay the $60 or more to play single player Diablo3. Sure, it has single player (back in the day Quake2 had one as well), but if you intend to spend more than a few hours playing it, then you're the 1%. I would hate to have this DRM on a single player game, but D3 is essentially a multiplayer game which has a single player option. I'm buying it and honestly didn't even know for sure if you can play offline and don't much care.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

DroolTwist (1357725) | about 2 years ago | (#39570497)

I love the game, so count me in the 1% for the 'single player option in a multiplayer game'. While I consider the DRM and having to play online an annoyance, I'd label it as a minor one. If for some reason I can't connect to play, I'll view it as I always have with MMOs: a signal to go do something useful until I can play. I did my own thing in those (I triple boxed, as did my wife, so we always had our own group when logging on. In EQ2 this was awesome as the group size was six). I will miss the fast LAN play when we play together though. Hopefully, its not horribly lagged.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570249)

It's not really so much as always on DRM, as it is always online like an MMO.
The always online means:
They can easily make changes on the server like balance fixes etc without client patches.
Allow you to use your "single player" instance in multiplayer without worrying that you cheat hacked the character.
Still let you interact with some online components like auction house.
Not have to test offline vs online modes.

I mean, if you have an unreliable internet connection or want to play on the go on a laptop it sucks, but I genuinely do believe the DRM aspect is more of a "bonus" side effect of the decision rather than the goal of the decision.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 2 years ago | (#39570403)

Hacking my characters was half the fun of D2. I wanted to play different builds, but really wasn't interested in going through the beginning of the game another dozen times.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 2 years ago | (#39570745)

I don't think it works that way. They even added a way to reset your skill points in D2 in a (very) late patch, though only once per difficulty. Still, I think you won't have to hack your character just to try a different build.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 2 years ago | (#39570865)

It's more than just skills, though... Resetting skill points will not change my barbarian to a rogue, reopen a particular quest dungeon, or let me play an act backwards.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Chris Burke (6130) | about 2 years ago | (#39571033)

Oh, okay. I'm not as sympathetic to your desire to change classes without starting a new character, or mucking with the game flow. I doubt blizzard is either. Sucks to be you, I guess.

You could revisit any dungeon in the game in D2 as many times as you wanted; I don't know if D3 would change this but I don't see why they would. Do you mean you also wanted to get any unique prize at the end again, like the skill-point scroll?

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570859)

Good news then, D3 fixes that for you. You only have to level each class once and then you can have any skill set you want with the free respec system they have.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | about 2 years ago | (#39570259)

Ditto. One of the few times I have free time to play games is in the evening during deer hunting season. Our deer camp is out in the sticks, no internet for miles around. If I can't play a game I legitimately purchased without continuously getting the company's constant approval, I'm not interested.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (3, Funny)

niado (1650369) | about 2 years ago | (#39570863)

Wow! It seems Blizzard did not anticipate this backlash from the plays-in-a-deer-stand-only segment of the player base!

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39571049)

Are you kidding? What do you think that we do for those long hours that we spend waiting for deers?
I'll stick with Skyrim while on my hunts!

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570267)

Diablo III?

I'll start to care when a warez group has fixed the game and I can play it offline...

NEXT!

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570277)

The DRM might piss some people off but isn't the server-client integrity quite important when dealing with real money transactions within the game such as the real money auction house?

Re:The real state of Diablo III (2)

lytlebill (659903) | about 2 years ago | (#39570449)

The DRM might piss some people off but isn't the server-client integrity quite important when dealing with real money transactions within the game such as the real money auction house?

It would. And it is a problem easily ('easily' in theory, though not perhaps in execution) solved: I can create characters 'online,' which are stored on Blizzard servers, only playable when connected to the internet for communication with said servers, and can vend their inventories on an RMT market. I can also create characters 'offline,' which can be played anytime, connected or not, and whose inventories can't interact with an RMT market. This is a solution which would give Blizzard the ability to keep a tight reign on RMT market activity and still give people to chance to play on a plane, or on a laptop with the wireless off to save battery, or on a dodgy internet connection. It would not, however, serve as DRM, which is half the reason (if not more) why they're doing this in the first place. Yes, Blizzard wants to control RMT stuff tightly, which is why the game is "always online." But they also want to try and stop the pirates, which is why there's no offline play. Simply put, their desire to try and stop the pirates is more important to them than an offline mode for the (who knows how many) players that want/need it.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (1)

Y2KDragon (525979) | about 2 years ago | (#39570725)

It would. And it is a problem easily ('easily' in theory, though not perhaps in execution) solved: I can create characters 'online,' which are stored on Blizzard servers, only playable when connected to the internet for communication with said servers, and can vend their inventories on an RMT market. I can also create characters 'offline,' which can be played anytime, connected or not, and whose inventories can't interact with an RMT market. This is a solution which would give Blizzard the ability to keep a tight reign on RMT market activity and still give people to chance to play on a plane, or on a laptop with the wireless off to save battery, or on a dodgy internet connection. It would not, however, serve as DRM, which is half the reason (if not more) why they're doing this in the first place. Yes, Blizzard wants to control RMT stuff tightly, which is why the game is "always online." But they also want to try and stop the pirates, which is why there's no offline play. Simply put, their desire to try and stop the pirates is more important to them than an offline mode for the (who knows how many) players that want/need it.

Oh, so much like in Diablo II, where your on-line character was different from your local? Funny, you'd think that if such a thing were already possible, it could be a feature in the new game. Guess the devs didn't consider that path.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570939)

They have stated multiple times why they didn't do this. They feel that playing on Battle.net with friends and or random strangers is the way that many people will eventually want to play, and the way that the game was designed to be enjoyed. By letting people play off line with characters that can't go onto Blizzard servers it effectively 'traps' people offline and out of the ideal usage. This is a negative experience and one they don't want to deal with. The review mentions that it happened to him, it's happened to me, and it probably has happened to many other people as well.

They are optimizing for the common case. Most people have internet connections. People will enjoy themselves more if they use the product the way it was intended to be used. Blizzard taking away options that they have determined, through study and consideration, to be sub optimal is not nefarious. It is them trying to make a better game.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570391)

Seriously?

I think that it's pretty reasonable to assume that if you can afford to drop $2k on a gaming computer (or equivalent amounts on a TV + gaming console), you've got Internet access.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (4, Informative)

damnbunni (1215350) | about 2 years ago | (#39570529)

Not necessarily RELIABLE internet access.

I live in the US, just outside a town of 200,000 people. I'm half a mile from a school.

In order for me to get RELIABLE internet that's faster than dialup would cost me $2,419.60.

Per month.

I use cellular internet. It's not terribly expensive, and it works well enough, and it's fast enough. But it does lag out and drop out a lot, and if I lost my game progress every time it did, I'd get mightily pissed.

I get mad enough as is when Steam decides that since it can sort of see the internet, but not connect to the Steam server, then it won't even start up enough for me to put it in offline mode, so I can't play Steam games nyah nyah.

And that's just a check at the client start, not a constant connection,

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

niado (1650369) | about 2 years ago | (#39570893)

But it does lag out and drop out a lo

There were a lot of players in World of Warcraft who had similar issues. Unfortunately WoW also did not have an offline single-player mode.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (2)

Satanboy (253169) | about 2 years ago | (#39570401)

I agree with OP.

My roomates have decided to buy D3, I am going to be the outsider on this one.

I bought SWTOR and was heavily disappointed, I'm not buying any more games that 'might' be what I want.
The DRM really seals the deal for me, if it weren't for that I'd probably buy it just to toss on my laptop to play once in a while, but with the DRM, it's just craptastic garbage.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570623)

/signed. Not that I have any problem with the wireless, but with Diablo not being my most beloved series it's just too easy to pass on this one and at least try to make a point. Would be the first Blizzard game to not get my money in quite some time - a pity.

Re:The real state of Diablo III (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570879)

How was this modded insightful... /smh

Looks Dated (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570171)

Not bashing or anything, but this really looks like a lot of other games that have been out for a while. I'm sure it will be good, but it seems like Blizzard got with it a little too late. That and the pointless DRM that's really putting me off the game.

Can someone upload the videos to Youtube? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570209)

I can't watch them here because I am to lazy to unblock the advertising.

Or just reply and tell me if that game will still be released with DRM.

OMG! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570219)

Yeah! no... I would've been hyped over this a few years ago.

DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570253)

I might buy this, but only if I can download a crack and play off-line. If that doesn't happen, then Blizzard doesn't get my money.

Diablo two and a half: (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570361)

So I've been playing an isometric arpg called Path of Exile for the last week+. It's still in beta, and the story is fleshing out, but the gameplay itself is really polished, and it has lots of interesting features I won't list, but to name a few:

Diablo 2 is it's role-model.
Skills/spells go into gem sockets similar to FF7's materia.
Passive skills are assigned to a board, similar to FF10.
There is no gold, rather players trade "orbs", which vary in what they do, from turn a normal item into a rare, or change the numerical properties on a magical item, etc., etc. This is also the "crafting" for the game.

Anyways, I'm not affiliated with the company (A 16-man team out of New Zeeland), but am hoping to spread some word of mouth so others can find and play it. Look me up if you have any questions, Harvester is my IGN.

Re:Diablo two and a half: (4, Interesting)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | about 2 years ago | (#39570521)

So I've been playing an isometric arpg called Path of Exile for the last week+. It's still in beta, and the story is fleshing out, but the gameplay itself is really polished, and it has lots of interesting features I won't list, but to name a few:

Diablo 2 is it's role-model.
Skills/spells go into gem sockets similar to FF7's materia.
Passive skills are assigned to a board, similar to FF10.
There is no gold, rather players trade "orbs", which vary in what they do, from turn a normal item into a rare, or change the numerical properties on a magical item, etc., etc. This is also the "crafting" for the game.

Anyways, I'm not affiliated with the company (A 16-man team out of New Zeeland), but am hoping to spread some word of mouth so others can find and play it. Look me up if you have any questions, Harvester is my IGN.

I played it on the stress test last weekend. I hadn't heard of it before last week and came into it without preconceived notions. I think it might better be labeled Diablo 3.5 than 2.5 - it seems to take the good from 2, discard the bad, and introduce new ideas to a much greater degree than D3. Also, it's supposedly going to be F2P despite the level of polish that looks equivalent to D3's beta.

Meh. (4, Interesting)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 2 years ago | (#39570375)

Diablo 2 was great... good enough graphics for its time, with a challenging skill system and, most importantly to me, a fantastic story. Then it ended on a cliffhanger, with one of the Prime Evils still loose. Then the expansion ended on somewhat less of a cliffhanger: "I'm going to destroy this thing, and I have no idea what's going to happen to the world."

I want to play the next installment, I really do... but I probably won't. I've been hearing about it for two years, and the excitement's gone. Sure, it was neat to read about the new classes and see the new baddies. It was fun to go back and play the first two again to remember the story. Now all I hear about is DRM and auctions.

If I wanted artificial restrictions, I'd go lock myself in a dark room for a few hours. If I wanted an auction, I'd go browse eBay. I don't want those, though. I want a visual interactive story, so I'm going to play a video game. Perhaps someday I'll be able to buy D3 off of GOG to find out the end of the story, or perhaps even get a pirated version (ignoring my usual attitude toward those lazy mooching pirates). Maybe I'll break down and buy the retail version, if I get excited again.

My attitude right now is an utterly non-committal "meh." Sorry, Blizzard, but you've lost my attention, and I doubt you'll get it back again.

Re:Meh. (5, Informative)

guido1 (108876) | about 2 years ago | (#39570633)

Now all I hear about is DRM and auctions.

If I wanted artificial restrictions, I'd go lock myself in a dark room for a few hours. If I wanted an auction, I'd go browse eBay. I don't want those, though. I want a visual interactive story, so I'm going to play a video game.

Having been in the beta since November or so, all I can tell you is that you're visiting the wrong websites. I've bought 0 items at an auction house, and sold just as many. Maybe this means I won't end up with the top 10% of gear, but that's fine by me.

The story is there, the gameplay is there. Tristram is once again in trouble. Decard Cain is still old. The button mash fast "sweet got a rare" fun is still present.

If you're convinced you won't buy it, or have a moral obligation not to due to the DRM, fine. I found it to be a nice continuation of the series and will be plopping down my $.

Re:Meh. (3, Insightful)

twocows (1216842) | about 2 years ago | (#39570661)

At least there are Path of Exile and Torchlight 2. I'm still excited, even if it's not about Diablo 3, personally.

Re:Meh. (1)

skovnymfe (1671822) | about 2 years ago | (#39571111)

So what you're saying is you've grown out of playing games. Big whoop, really. There'll be 20 people to replace you.

Exciting video! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570417)

Ooh, I do like a nice long hard...look.

Auction House (2)

Yvan256 (722131) | about 2 years ago | (#39570547)

I hope they don't repeat the same stupid useless feature of World of Warcraft's auction house: stacks.

Why stacks are completely pointless:
- People list dozens if not hundreds of 1-item listings in order to bury others who sell by stacks.
- Sorting by price means you're sorting by stack price, which is pointless. Sorting by price should be based on the price per unit.
- Selling items should never "stack". You have 56 items for sale, that's all there is to it.
- If I want to only buy 8 units and you've got the lowest price per unit, then I buy 8 of those 56 units that you have for sale.
- If people are selling at the same price as you, then items listed earlier have precedence.

Whoever thought using stacks in the auction house was a good idea never actually used it.

Re:Auction House (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570705)

I like purchasing stacks. Yes its hard to make money selling it, but when your trying to level a profession quickly, you don't want to buy 5000 single items, when you can buy 500 stacks for example. I think they should refine the AH. Purchase by stack or single item and purchase buy single item price. I do agree with you there, but sometimes I want to purchase in bulk and not have to sit 30 minutes clicking items into my bags from the mailbox

Re:Auction House (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570901)

He never said a thing about having to buy 5000 single items - you click the listing, click buy, enter how many you want. Just like EVE.

Re:Auction House (1)

Whorhay (1319089) | about 2 years ago | (#39570965)

Your complaint is more a problem of how you recieve your purchased good than how the market system actually functions.

I just started playing Eve last weekend and so far I really like how the market there is set up. You can sort any which way you want. You can post buy and sell orders. When you buy something it's automatically placed in your storage, at whichever station it was posted from. The fact that the markets are all locality based allows for some real commerce though it isn't necessary in a game like Diablo 3. The only reason that method wouldn't work in many other games like WoW and Diablo 3 is because of the perverse storage limitations. Which, by the way, in a game driven by item collecting makes no sense other than as a way to incite a little more grinding.

Re:Auction House (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570763)

Regarding your "I want to buy 8 of those 56 units" comment. I agree that it should be an option if the seller allows it, but seriously? When I post items in MMO auction houses, I post variable stack sizes with larger stacks at cheaper per unit costs. It's done specifically to provide incentive for a buyer to purchase more of my wares at a cheaper price. It allows me to optimize profits between people who just want one or two pieces, and people who want a lot. It's just like in real life where you purchase things cheaper wholesale/in bulk.

Re:Auction House (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570771)

You can sell stacks of items, but from a buyers perspective you only see one listing with the current price and the average over the last few days. Set an amount you want to buy and that's pretty much it.

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/3595343777

Re:Auction House (1)

niado (1650369) | about 2 years ago | (#39570951)

You are pretty much spot-on there. I used to poke around and find lowest PPU for commodity goods and then spam the AH with singles at an up-charge. There were other somewhat dubious AH tricks I learned in WoW that I'm interested to try out in the D3 RMAH.

Re:Auction House (1)

thesandtiger (819476) | about 2 years ago | (#39571069)

Use auctionator and those issues go away. It's free and trivial to install and use.

While WoW has integrated many addons into their core UI, they also added the ability to use addons for things where users want to customize their UI even more, so there's really no reason to settle for the stock UI if some element of it doesn't work for you.

Re:Auction House (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39571119)

Actually, the problem with stacks was the crappy default WOW UI that made it easy for people to scam and bury others. When I still played WOW I used a custom addon for it and the annoyance and trepidation regarding getting boned went away very fast.

Re:Auction House (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#39571155)

It would have a cool idea to select how much you would buy out of a stack. But there are times when you want to buy all 56 of an item. For any crafting profession, people might want to do it all once. Buy a stack, start crafting, get a drink while it finishes, etc.

God-awful advertisements (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39570565)

The instant an ad with a FUCKING ALARM CLOCK came on in place of the video I was trying to watch, I just closed the tab. Sorry, Slashdot, but I'll just wait until May.

p90x dvd (-1, Offtopic)

cheapp90xdvdsale (2605509) | about 2 years ago | (#39570881)

A spokesman for EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said it was "a great victory for democracy in Senegal and in Africa", reports the AFP news agency. "Senegal is a great example for Africa," he added.P90X DVD [cheapp90xdvdsale.com] AU Commission chairman Jean Ping said the peaceful conduct of the presidential elections "proved that Africa, despite its challenges, continues to register significant progress towards democracy and transparent elections".Cheap P90X DVD [cheapp90xdvdsale.com] Earlier, President Nicolas Sarkozy of Senegal's former colonial ruler, France, said the peaceful election was "good news for Africa in general and for Senegal in particular".P90X DVD Sale [cheapp90xdvdsale.com] "Senegal is a major African country and a model of democracy," he said. The election comes just days after a military coup in neighbouring Mali. Senegal remains the only country in West Africa to have never undergone a coup. Mr Wade "phoned his rival Macky Sall at 21:30 GMT [on Sunday] to congratulate him after the first results showed him to be the winner of a presidential run-off," the Senegalese Press Agency said.P90X Workout Schedule [cheapp90xdvdsale.com] Even before Mr Wade's concession, thousands of Sall supporters began celebrating on the streets of Dakar. Maldives defence officials say it is the first time Somali pirates have taken a ship in its waters.Insanity Workout [cheapp90xdvdsale.com] The vessel, the MV Eglantine, was hijacked off the north-western Hoarafush island.

Everyone may disagree, but... (1)

Higgins_Boson (2569429) | about 2 years ago | (#39571121)

...I am really enjoying the beta.

The gameplay feels smooth and polished, the updated graphics are a nice touch and not very over the top. The story is a little dull compared to even the original release of the game, but it's not hard to follow and does not overly bore me. The witch doctor class is all kinds of fun and the random comments made by the characters are sometimes witty and soft chuckle worthy.

As much as I hate Blizzard, I may just end up buying this game anyway.

How can we possibly disagree (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39571185)

How can we possibly disagree with your statement "I an really enjoying the beta"??? If you were to say "YOU will really enjoy the Beta", there'd be some wiggle room for the possibility for someone to disagree. But unless we can read your mind and see that you're telling porkies, how on EARTH can anyone disagree with your statement about YOUR enjoyment?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...