Beta
×

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!

Diablo III Released

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

Games 594

Almost 12 years after the launch of its predecessor, Diablo III has now been released. The game went live last night with over 8,000 midnight launch parties across the world. 2,000,000 players showed up for the beta test prior to launch, including 300,000 concurrently during an open beta weekend, but even so, the login servers struggled for the first few hours after launch. Diablo III had been in the works for quite some time — another example of Blizzard's notoriously long development cycle — and game director Jay Wilson said it was in "polish mode" for the past two years. "One of our sayings internally is 'polish as you go.' We have a belief that when you put a feature in, you should prototype, but then after you prototype you should do the real thing, and you should polish it to shipping quality." For those of you who are familiar with this type of game, there's an official game guide in which you can browse class skills, items, and other game information. There are also YouTube videos showing how each of the classes work.

cancel ×

594 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Interesting)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#40007891)

But should we really be celebrating one of the first major single-player games to *require* that you have an internet connection to even play in solo mode? You can still pop in your ancient copies of earlier Diablos and play. Will the same be true 10 or 15 years from now when the Diablo 3 servers no longer work, or if you should lose your internet connection for some reason (or if Blizzard ever goes belly-up)?

I know they want to fight piracy and all that. But once again, I think the people who will pay the price are the honest gamers who are going to be forced into piracy some day just to play the game they actually paid for. You try to do the right thing and end up having to make a choice between either not playing the game at all or becoming a criminal.

Now maybe they'll release a patch some day that will override this, or maybe they won't. But you can bet that the one group that will *definitely* have a patch are the pirates.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (3, Informative)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 2 years ago | (#40007939)

Will the same be true 10 or 15 years from now when the Diablo 3 servers no longer work, or if you should lose your internet connection for some reason (or if Blizzard ever goes belly-up)?

Sure, just Google for a crack to apply to your legally-owned copy. The Internet will always come through.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (4, Insightful)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008123)

Except under the DMCA cracking the game would still be illegal.

At this time we have no legal recourse to play a game if the DRM servers are taken down. Even in 15 years, they can still come after you for pirating the game if they wanted to.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008253)

Except that the DMCA only applies to the U.S. - so once someone outside the U.S. develops the patch, your machine gets infected with said patch and voila... All good and legal.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (4, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008445)

If you haven't realized that U.S. law applies everywhere now, you certainly will when the FBI asks your country to extradite you and they comply.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

GNious (953874) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008549)

Then I'm glad that I live in a country where the law explicitly prohibits extradition to countries with the Death Penalty... ...though why our goverment allow and support rendition, I cannot fathom.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008599)

You do know that there is something outside the US of A. That is the first step, now spend some time reseaching equivalents of DMCA in those possible places outside, I'll give you a hint: EUCD.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Interesting)

jmerlin (1010641) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008629)

This isn't true. The interoperability clause in the DMCA is what makes no-CD cracks legal. A no-internet crack would be legal by the same reasoning. When you start using it to distribute infringing copies of the game, yes, you are violating copyright law, the same way a no-CD crack let you play a ripped copy of older games, despite the crack itself being legal for personal use.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008231)

Nope.

The game client is "dumb" - all the AI and such is done server-side. It's similar in execution to an MMO with only a single player (or small group).

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Informative)

hvdh (1447205) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008233)

It's a bit more complicated than just hacking away some license check. Each game happens in it's own randomly generated game world.

The world generator code & data is server-side only. The game client does not have the code to generate a world, it can only display and navigate a world. I heard that some (or all?) world generator stuff was shipped with the closed alpha test builds, but was removed before beta test.

It would take somebody to code something emulating a Blizzard D3 server with quite some logic.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008475)

Or stealing it. This may well happen.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008673)

You mean like the people the emulate WOW servers?

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (2)

PIBM (588930) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008247)

except that most probably the crack will not be able to provide exactly the same experience as the backend server of diablo III. Ever tried to play on an illegitime wow server ? It's the same word, yet, people are unable to provide the same information about what is going on in the background. I guess that they kept most of the important stuff on their diablo III backend, and that even a crack could not fix that.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (2)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008427)

Actually most of the "private" WoW servers are carbon copies of blizzard's own servers. Blizzard leaks a whole lot of code server side apparently.

The reason for "different experience" lies in various modifiers applied to servers (like gaining way more exp) as well as oftentimes asshole-ish owners.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (3, Interesting)

AntiNazi (844331) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008517)

Unless a LOT has changed in the last few expansions, they didn't leak enough. Huge amounts of quests and integral spells did not work on privates last time I tried to play on one (admittedly during vanilla). These were things people definitely wanted to work but couldn't make happen, not your standard mods of xp and gold amounts.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (2)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008545)

Reminds me of Project 1999 [project1999.org] a recreation of classic EverQuest. It's an absolutely phenomenal experience for anyone with fond memories of EQ. However, it's not perfect as the world has been pieced together from various leaks, logs and web posts but in all honesty that's half the fun!

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (4, Insightful)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008435)

No, because then I'd be supporting a company that supports DRM. Instead, I'll just not buy the game at all.

Like bnetd, it'll be demonized (0)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 2 years ago | (#40007945)

Now maybe they'll release a patch some day that will override this, or maybe they won't. But you can bet that the one group that will *definitely* have a patch are the pirates.

However, anyone that advocates for such patch will be demonized, the project sued into oblivion, and Blizzard steals any domain names associated with the project.

Re:Like bnetd, it'll be demonized (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40007999)

Just look at what happened to WowGlider. Enough said.

Re:Like bnetd, it'll be demonized (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008089)

I believe he is referring to bnetd. I can see how a younger person might not have known about that.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Insightful)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 2 years ago | (#40007997)

Blizzard is one of the few companies to patch their older games years later to no longer require the CD's to play.

It wouldn't surprise me if down the road they patched Diablo III to no longer require an internet connection.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (2, Informative)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008163)

But there is no guarantee of that.
15 years down the road, if they take the servers down will anyone care? Will anyone even remember this post?

But then we'll have a ton of games that are on a planned obsolescence scale.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1, Interesting)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008359)

15 years from now we'll have games and entertainment that will make us not care if some grotty old point and click thing still works.

But it could just be me, I admit. I never understood gaming nostalgia. I try and go retro once in a while. Lasts about a day or two.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008483)

D2 was actively played until D3's release. That's what, 12 years now?

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

couchinator (2441920) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008619)

Yeah; I don't know why people are assuming that Blizzard will shut down the D3 servers any time soon. They are pretty good about keeping their game servers alive.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008527)

My 13 year old Warcraft2 B.Net ed still works just fine.

"Why invest into computer when electrical grids may not even exist in 10-15 years?" ---- that is you right now

Long term support, removal of security, etc (5, Informative)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008503)

Blizzard is one of the few companies to patch their older games years later to no longer require the CD's to play. It wouldn't surprise me if down the road they patched Diablo III to no longer require an internet connection.

Just to elaborate on this for those unfamiliar with Blizzard's older games. It is *not* that they simply put out a patch to remove the CD requirement.

The older starcraft and diablo games have been actively supported for over 10 years. Periodic updates for bug fixes, exploit fixes, new features, new support for communities and tournament organizations (thinking about some starcraft 1 updates), etc.

Blizzard has a team dedicated to actively maintaining and enhancing their "old" games. It is *not* an afterthought for the original dev team if and when they have time like at other companies.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008003)

Yes, it is a form of DRM what they're doing here. But i believe a lot of people are quite ok with that (as opposed to Ubisoft for example), since they are providing a lot of perks for requiring to be always online.
Will the game still be here 10 years from now? No idea. If blizzard will still exist then i sure it will. If it'll go belly up, oh well, sucks to be the gamer then.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

mhajicek (1582795) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008377)

Yes, a lot of people are ok with that. However a lot of people are NOT ok with that. I for one do NOT welcome our new software-as-a-service overlords.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

durrr (1316311) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008399)

My favourite perk is the "trying to connect to bnet servers like this is some mmo" perk. I hear everyone enjoys it equally much.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (2)

idontgno (624372) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008559)

OTOH, if you succeed, you score an in-game achievement. Awesome.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008025)

While it's anecdotal for a single company, you can still play Diablo and Diablo 2 on Battle.net, not just on single player. As long as Blizzard exists you'll probably be able to play Diablo 3. It's not perfect, but at least it's not as bad as some companies (EA, Ubi).

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (4, Informative)

Vaphell (1489021) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008269)

the difference is that here you got almost mmo requirements - server does much more than it did in case of older titles, which was facilitate connection between players. You don't need much power to do that. Afaik in D3 the servers provide monster AI, control the amount of map data sent to the client (to fight maphacks?), manage drops and shit - the computing power required stops being trivial and the maintenance will cost some serious dough.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008575)

It's not perfect, but at least it's not as bad as some companies (EA, Ubi).

Activision. Oops, Blizzard is Activision now.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Interesting)

Spad (470073) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008031)

To quote the PC Gamer "live review":

I alt+tab out to check my net connection, and it’s working fine. When I get back in, the game’s quit to the main menu with an error saying there’s been an error – it has a number but no specifics. When I try to get back in, it throws up another error that says to make sure all of my party is ready. I’m playing single player. In a few minutes I’m able to log back in and play again. I’ve lost all my progress through the current zone and the world has reset and repopulated with monsters, but my character, items and quest status are intact.

There’s a lot to say about the fact that this can happen even in single player, but I’ll keep it brief: this is utter bullshit.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008191)

Wait, randomly having the world reset is NOT a feature?

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008361)

Wait, randomly having the world reset is NOT a feature?

well, blizzard considers that a feature. doing the same dungeons again and again and keeping the gear is a feature. more than a feature, it's the game itself..

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008049)

Indeed. I will not be playing this one. Even pirated. Torchlight II will get my money, time, and affection. Blizzard can FOAD.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Interesting)

slyrat (1143997) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008413)

Indeed. I will not be playing this one. Even pirated. Torchlight II will get my money, time, and affection. Blizzard can FOAD.

I agree, for a third of the price (1/4 if you find 3 friends) you can get Torchlight 2. I've already bought the 4 pack and am eagerly waiting for torchlight 2 to go live. They are doing beta testing now so hopefully it won't be too much longer.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

mhajicek (1582795) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008443)

Just checked it out, Torchlight looks pretty sweet. Diablo III is out? Time to buy Torchlight!

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008513)

I'd rather it didn't FOAD just because of this game. I'm still enjoying SC2 custom maps, I'll likely be buying HoS expansion when it comes out unless they institute similar lame DRM as D3 (unlikely) and I'll probably play MoP.

I won't be playing D3 because the DRM model and RMAH leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (3, Interesting)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008521)

Both will get my money and time, and neither will get my affection.

Affection is for people, not companies.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008115)

My Internet is always up. As I played 10 minutes today, my Internet went down and I was booted out. A little irritating. When I played Diablo 2, I played once offline, then I only played online. I wanted to be able to play with the mostly legit pool of players. I didn't want a repeat of the first Diablo and being required myself to use some hacks so player killers wouldn't one shot me. It's the only cheat I ever used as I don't believe in cheating. So, I never really played on the "open battle.net" in D2 as I believed I would have had to deal with even more cheaters, like in the first. (Open battle.net allowed you to play online with your offline character if I remember correctly)

In the end, while I think not being able to play solo offline is a major loss, I know that I want to play online with people, so the always-on connection isn't that big a deal to me. Diablo is very much a multiplayer experience for me. Just the same, I never bought Assassins Creed and I don't buy any solo player games that required and instant on connection.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

mhajicek (1582795) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008497)

Case in point, your internet connection went down and you were booted out after ten minutes of play. My wife and I used to log dozens and dozens of hours on Diablo II playing together and with other friends over LAN without a hitch. Without that option I'm not buying.

Let me have my many offline alts! (5, Informative)

LambdaWolf (1561517) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008171)

The real evil here, where players will suffer even if they don't mind jumping through the hoops, is the limit of 10 characters per game copy, even if they are only used for single player. That pisses me off. I've been told you don't "need" more than that many, because there are only five classes times two sexes, and apparently no exclusive character choices such that you would need alts for game-mechanics reasons. But you're SOL if you want to enjoy the game experience from level 1 forward and don't want to delete any of your old characters.

But... I went and picked up my collector's edition this morning anyway. I already play all-online games such as World of Warcraft with similar limitations. I can reluctantly live with with paying for Diablo III as long as I think of it that way: as a limited Internet service and not a game you can really, you know, have. It would be a better product if it were the latter, but oh well. Hopefully it will at least be fun.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Informative)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008181)

You are, of course, severely late to the party; a lot of interesting discussion on this point happened way back in August. Here's the Slashdot conversation from then [slashdot.org] . I believe the consensus is that since this is Blizzard and not EA, no boycott like the one that marred Spore's release will transpire, and the loss of flexibility will simply be accepted.

Another controversy from about the same time (which didn't receive Slashdot attention) is that all gameplay-altering modifications are banned [kotaku.com] in D3, a somewhat harsher stance than the one Blizzard took with WoW interface mods. There has been some concern [battle.net] that DarkD3 [technabob.com] , a mod that diminishes the game's 'painted' look to make it clearer and crisper graphics may be cause for a ban, but so far the word is "probably not".

at least simcity 2013 will only need it to start (2)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008193)

at least simcity 2013 will only need it to start the game.

Now why can't it be once a week?

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Interesting)

arkhan_jg (618674) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008195)

Pre-ordered a copy a couple of weeks because a bunch of friends are also going to play it, despite me normally avoiding always-on DRM for single player games like the plague. Retail copy arrived today, get home to play. Had already preinstalled the game, put my retail code in via the website... And have spent literally the last hour (6.30 to 7.30pm UK time) trying to login to the bloody thing to play single player, nothing but error 37 and error 75.

Fuck Blizzard for requiring always-on DRM, and then cheaping out on enough servers to meet demand. Fuck em right up the arse.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Informative)

RogueyWon (735973) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008225)

I've had a general policy of not buying games for any platform if their PC version requires an always-on connection (aside from MMOs, which it would be unfair to penalise, as "always on" is the very nature of the game there). This means I've missed out on every Assassin's Creed game since the original and a few other titles to boot.

I agonised about Diablo 3. It did look, at face value, like a straightforward case of Ubisoft-style DRM. However, Blizzard did push quite hard the line that the game had integral features that meant they couldn't have done it without the always-on without making serious compromises to the game. I was... unconvinced. So I decided to wait and see how things went at launch.

As it happens, Blizzard then wheeled out that "subscribe to WoW for a year get Diablo 3 free" thing at just about the time when I was in the market to get back into an MMO. On balance, I decided that I might as well go for that.

Now that I've had a few hours with Diablo 3, I can conclude that if it hadn't been for the WoW special offer, this would still have been firmly in the "boycott" camp. I've yet to see any online features that could not have been made 100% optional at no expense to the player (though possibly at some expense to Blizzard through lost real-money auction house fees). If you're in the "undecided" camp on D3 over its DRM, my advice would be to avoid it.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

slyrat (1143997) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008487)

I've had a general policy of not buying games for any platform if their PC version requires an always-on connection (aside from MMOs, which it would be unfair to penalise, as "always on" is the very nature of the game there). This means I've missed out on every Assassin's Creed game since the original and a few other titles to boot.

I agonised about Diablo 3. It did look, at face value, like a straightforward case of Ubisoft-style DRM. However, Blizzard did push quite hard the line that the game had integral features that meant they couldn't have done it without the always-on without making serious compromises to the game. I was... unconvinced. So I decided to wait and see how things went at launch.

As it happens, Blizzard then wheeled out that "subscribe to WoW for a year get Diablo 3 free" thing at just about the time when I was in the market to get back into an MMO. On balance, I decided that I might as well go for that.

Now that I've had a few hours with Diablo 3, I can conclude that if it hadn't been for the WoW special offer, this would still have been firmly in the "boycott" camp. I've yet to see any online features that could not have been made 100% optional at no expense to the player (though possibly at some expense to Blizzard through lost real-money auction house fees). If you're in the "undecided" camp on D3 over its DRM, my advice would be to avoid it.

This is exactly the kind of reasons, along with price, that I'm going into the Torchlight 2 camp.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008263)

But should we really be celebrating one of the first major single-player games to *require* that you have an internet connection to even play in solo mode?

You're modded up to +5, but hell, +10 wouldn't be enough.

If we all collectively support this - letting companies tell us where and when we can run software we buy - then soon there will be no other choice. Control of our computers will effectively be taken away.

Sure, you can download some crack with unknown amounts of malware infesting it, but that's dancing around the central issue.

It shouldn't be necessary to have to ask our masters whether we can run a game we paid for. *** Don't support that model ***. Anyone who does is just begging for ever more intrusive measures.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (5, Insightful)

Translation Error (1176675) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008309)

I personally don't like the required internet connection, but I wouldn't say it's strictly to prevent piracy. I'm sure everyone remembers what a mess dupers and hackers made of Diablo II; having everything server-side is an effort to stop the same thing from happing to D3. And with the real money auction house, such measures really are necessary because in-game items have an actual cash value.

So, yes, I'd prefer it if there was an offline single player mode with modding possible, but I understand why they don't have one and that there are benefits to doing it that way.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (4, Funny)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008343)

Yes, by virtue that I am not poor and can afford the game and have access to constant broadband internet. Also 10 - 15 years from now, Diablo 4 will be out requiring probes stuck in various orifices to play so why would you want to play a 10 - 15 year old game that doesn't use probes?

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008351)

Mitt Romney is going to punish the banks who stole your money--with less regulation and lower taxes. That'll teach 'em!

Uh, no bank "stole my money", and Obama has done nothing for the country but throw parties with George Clooney. I'll take a shot on the successful businessman to turn around the economy.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008421)

Blizzard did this because they can. While other games with such a restriction wouldn't sell enough copies to cover lunch, Diablo 3 will make plenty of Blizzard investors into millionaires.

You can rant about how evil and/or stupid this is...but from their perspective it makes perfect sense. And the money you (and 99.9999% of the other Diablo fans) will give them will prove them right.

Re:Hate to put a damper on the celebration (1)

eth1 (94901) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008429)

But should we really be celebrating one of the first major single-player games to *require* that you have an internet connection to even play in solo mode? You can still pop in your ancient copies of earlier Diablos and play. Will the same be true 10 or 15 years from now when the Diablo 3 servers no longer work, or if you should lose your internet connection for some reason (or if Blizzard ever goes belly-up)?

A shame... I played the heck out of Diablo I and II, but I completely stopped even bothering to follow the development of DIII when heard about the single-player internet requirement.

NewFail (4, Interesting)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#40007953)

NewEgg has failed me for the first time in a decade. I pre-ordered a copy ($10 off) but they didn't bother shipping it until today (UPS 3 day). Considering D3 has an interesting DRM that allows you to install it before the launch date and just prevents you from playing it until then, it would have made more sense to me if NewEgg shipped them late last week so they would arrive today or yesterday. One egg off for poor planning.

Re:NewFail (3, Informative)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008027)

Actually, I take that back. I have friends who got it today and they can't even join a game the servers are so overloaded. Looks like I'm missing nothing by waiting another day or two.

Re:NewFail (1)

Andr T. (1006215) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008035)

I've got it today and I've played it for a while. It seems the servers are in maintenance now.

Re:NewFail (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008257)

Hopefully they are taking some hardware from WoW.

</bitter>

Re:NewFail (1)

chill (34294) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008043)

Look on the bright side. All that extra bandwidth available to surf porn while you wait!

Re:NewFail (2)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008111)

I play Diablo. I already have *all* of the porn on my hard drive.

Re:NewFail (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008201)

And we care because...

Re:NewFail (1)

GoNINzo (32266) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008607)

I also am a little disappointed in this. They ended up shipping mine yesterday evening, so I'm slated for end of day tomorrow. Which is kind of a pain since I have tomorrow scheduled off. (Yes, I took a comp day to play Diablo 3 since I worked Saturday, what of it!)

Surprise (2)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008033)

I can't believe it took over 14 (or 13,12,11 depending on time zone) hours from the launch of Diablo III for an article to get on /. I guess all the gamers were busy trying to log in?

Don't care (4, Informative)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008047)

Requires an internet connection even for single player.

Not paying for that. I'll go find some indie developer to give my money to instead.

Torchlight, better game less money. (4, Informative)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008121)

Check out torchlight 2, It looks really good and will allow multi-player without all the hassle.

Re:Don't care (1)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008207)

Same here, I'm boycotting it along side ME3.

Indie games are in no short supply right now.

Re:Don't care (1)

bfandreas (603438) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008241)

I very well remember the single-player come online thing that was open battlenet in D2. It was infested with blatant cheats. Not the relatively uncommon dupes of D3 closed battlenet but really blatant edited items. Like the ever popular giant charm +7 skill to everything. Your D3 singleplayer games are closed bnet games with only you in it. As such, D3 doesn't really have a proper singleplayer mode. All games are hosted. Single or not. A singleplayer mode would have been nice, just don't let them take their characters online. Open bnet was ugly.
What really disturbs me is how shallow the skill system is in D3. While in D2 only cookie cutter builds were really viable it also allowed for really quirky and extreme and very gear dependent insane builds that were nearly competetive.
I'll play D3 until the cows(there are no cows) come home hoping that some of the depth will be there. Also what made D2 really interesting in a pathetic OCD kind of way was you couldn't respec. I used to plan for days how to spec and stat my new twinks assuming the availability of semi-affordable stuff and trading my things in trading forums so I could get what I needed. Interestingly I still think the best runeword was HelLumFal.
Yes, I'm a D2 nerd.

DRM-free Torrent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008057)

I'll be 1st in line for that one baby!!

Re:DRM-free Torrent? (1)

rodrigoandrade (713371) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008137)

After being burned by the always-on requirement of Starcraft 2, I'll be 2nd in that line.

those pictures... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008059)

so... much... virginity...

captcha: springer

Polish Mode (5, Funny)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008097)

"Diablo III had been in the works for quite some time — another example of Blizzard's notoriously long development cycle — and game director Jay Wilson said it was in "polish mode" for the past two years."

No fair that Poland got it two years early >_>

Re:Polish Mode (4, Funny)

Chemisor (97276) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008403)

Hey, don't blame Blizzard for putting in the hard work. It takes time and effort to reverse polish notation.

Re:Polish Mode (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008571)

Ju vant us too inwade zem, Herr Hillman? ;)

Release Failure (5, Interesting)

don depresor (1152631) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008105)

So they told us that having to connect to their servers to play in single player mode wouldn't be a problem, that we should trust them.

And now the EU login server is melting under the pounding of thousands of angry players trying to play solo.

And to add insult to injury they didn't even have the nice idea of implementing queues like most similar systems do..

Re:Release Failure (5, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008125)

And to add insult to injury they didn't even have the nice idea of implementing queues like most similar systems do..

Why should anyone ever have to queue to play a single player game?

Re:Release Failure (4, Informative)

don depresor (1152631) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008205)

Because right now you have to login to their servers to play single player, and since the autentication servers are overloaded they just reject most of the connections, so you have to try a hundred times to get logged in. A queue would somewhat aleviate that problem.

Seriously, that stupid online single player idea is a damn fuckup...

Re:Release Failure (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008235)

Last night at around 5am EST, I was finally able to log in. Which is okay, because I wasn't doing anything anyway. I tried about 5mins ago and was able to log in without a problem. You'd think they'd have figured out what to do with all their practice with WoW/expansions and SC2. But maybe they just didn't expect it.

It's possible, then again they are offering a replacement copy to anyone who bought from GAME Australia who has a copy of their original receipt. [bluesnews.com] I'd link to the source, but I hate kotaku, and like Stephen much better, and he could use the ad traffic.

Not quite ready yet (4, Informative)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008117)

Add this [arstechnica.com] to the borked-beta weekend and I think they have more polishing to do.

Re:Not quite ready yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008317)

Mysle, ze gra jest w porzadku. Musisz byc gra na wersje angielska.

Re:Not quite ready yet (1)

MoonFog (586818) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008541)

There are errors all over the place, I've been stuck on "Retrieving Hero List" for more than an hour now ...

Whats the fun? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008133)

Excuse me for asking without more politeness, but i wonder what the fun in this game is.
I never gamed much, although i have enjoyed flying Battlefield2 helicopters, enjoyed C&C:Red Alert 1 strategy, and did some discover/viving in minecraft.

Isn't it just a lot of clicking while walking, attributing but nothing more but a score?

Or is there humor or honor/pride in the process?
Is there puzzles (i don't count "do ten times that" or "walk to southpole and be rerouted" as puzzles) or does another form of honor/pride come at play?

Re:Whats the fun? (2)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008227)

Diablo II had an interesting storyline, although the expansion was more of the last chapter of a book rather than an extension to the story. After you know the story, it's still fun to play as different characters and enjoy the challenge. Can you make a Barbarian that only throws? What about a melee Sorceress? It's not for everyone, but if you can master a unique style rather than grinding out the same old "winning" combinations as anyone else, it's quite fun.

Re:Whats the fun? (5, Interesting)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008239)

The fun of the action-RPG genre comes from a number of sources. First is crafting a character through a selection of choices. This is analogous to having a backpack that can only hold so many items and a large selection of tools to bring along. In a backpacking situation this would be something like: Perhaps you want a very sturdy shovel so that you can dig a very good fire pit and latrine, but then you don't have room for a comfortable chair.

The trade-offs involved make it entertaining to find a character loadout that fits your play style and preferences while also being "viable".

Beyond character selection there is skill in the "clicking and walking" where you're trying to keep track of what spells and abilities are activated at any given time and in what manner you approach enemies to ensure you efficiently dispatch them. Or, if you prefer, just running into combat and wading through it all with reckless abandon.

Thirdly, there's usually an aspect of item collection where you find new items that have different abilities attached and you try to find the synergy between different items and your character's strengths and weaknesses.

Finally there is usually a story associated with the game and, in the really good games, your actions modify the story and show some effect upon the game world.

Personally, I'm much more a fan of character creation and item discovery than the actual hack-and-slash or story parts, but it's all pretty fun for me.

Re:Whats the fun? (3, Insightful)

chispito (1870390) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008613)

Personally, I'm much more a fan of character creation and item discovery than the actual hack-and-slash or story parts, but it's all pretty fun for me.

Then I've got a game for you, and it's 100% less expensive than Diablo III.

Behold: http://www.nethack.org/ [nethack.org]

Poor sampling method (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008265)

Only the people with problems are here to post their complaints. Anyone who it's working fine for is too busy playing/enjoying it.

Except the bastards who have to work, like me, that is.

How's the gameplay though? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008291)

I was a huge Diablo junkie back in the day and I've been wondering how well the current version holds up? I've heard mixed reviews, ignoring the 'Horrible Game b/c of DRM, bla blah QQ' ones, since they're just whining and not based on the actual gameplay. I'm planning on buying this online tonight and hopefully playing tonight, but am still on the fence. I don't want to blow $60 on a game that is utterly disinteresting. Anyone here actually have it and had time to play? What are your thoughts?

I did think of buying it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008303)

up until they announced the DRM that they do not want to call DRM. I do not even consider torrenting it, but then I am old and I enjoy watching idiots getting their due.

In defense of some idiots however, it is not their fault that Blizzard did not deliver on the servers ( especially since they forced so many onto them ).

In a way, it is all a little sad. While in my household activision is a terrible curse word, I never would have thought that they would drag such an icon of a developer down.

Shame on you blizz

8000? (0)

ToiletBomber (2269914) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008353)

Huh, now it's over 9!!

Internet connection for single player mode? (4, Insightful)

ilsaloving (1534307) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008391)

Oh look, here's another game I'm not going to buy. I don't care how good your game is, if you pull bullshit DRM stunts like this, it's off my radar now and forever.

Maybe I'll download the pirated version and play that, just out of spite.

Re:Internet connection for single player mode? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008511)

Get your titties in a twist, Blizz doesn't care. And neither do we.

Good luck getting a pirated version to work. And don't forget to write from jail.

Diablo III servers down for maintenance... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008397)

Not even 12 hours after launch Blizzard is taking down US zone servers down for 3hr maintenance. Task: Calculate uptime so far.

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5051765603?page=1

11:30 a.m. PDT- We are in the process of performing an emergency maintenance for Diablo III servers in the Americas to resolve several issues that are currently impacting the game. This maintenance may cause some interruption in communication, ability to log in, use of in-game features, and disconnections. We anticipate all servers will be available for play at approximately 1:30 p.m. PDT. We will provide further updates as necessary. Thank you for your patience.

10: 22 a.m. PDT- We are in the process of performing an emergency maintenance for all North American Diablo III servers to resolve several issues that are currently impacting the game. This maintenance may cause some interruption in communication, ability to log in, use of in-game features, and disconnections. We anticipate all servers will be available for play in approximately 1 hour.

Thank you for your patience.

This whole article could have been summed up with (1)

Dutchmaan (442553) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008493)

Error 37

And a game I won't be buying. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40008509)

Fuck you guys. No, piracy isn't an issue, not even close. People would have bought this. Just wait till you see the login servers emulated, yeah, then you can cry about piracy you actual fuck-ups.

I'd seriously rather actually go on Skype to verify that I bought the game, be placed on a page on their website to state that I bought it, than require a constant internet connection.
Any retard who thinks always-online verification is a good system needs to actually be shot.
They are slowly killing the industry and blaming piracy.
When people pull shit like this, do you blame ANYONE for pirating a game?
YOU ARE THE PROBLEM, go get his by a bus. In fact, no, that will likely get the drivers life ruined, go fall down a cliff instead.

Thanks for ruining another series.

So far... kind of dull. (5, Interesting)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008539)

Lack luster story and quests, progression is on rails, no character customization and the itemization is dull. Bit of a let down overall. The defense is that the game doesn't REALLY start till nightmare difficulty, but that feels like a cop out to me.

Yeah but is it.... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008567)

Going to be as much of a steaming turd as Duke Nukem Forever was? Honestly, a lot of these much delayed sequels are turning out to be a waste of time for players.

So I was playing GW2 during launch and... (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#40008579)

Fun little tidbit. Guild Wars 2 stress test was tonight and it overlapped with D3 launch (started a few hours before D3 launch and ended a few hours after it).

When D3 launch moment came, you could see many people basically vanished from the game. You suddenly didn't have full servers anymore, structured PvP had a whole lot less games available and so on.

Considering that D3 launch was done terribly, I heard several guildies complain loudly on the voice comm about not being able to get into the game at all, and the fact that GW2 was only available for a few hours, you can tell just how immensely popular D3 is.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?