Diablo III Wild Speculation and Rumor Mongering Abounds

[Job601]

Diablo only mattered in a LAN setting.  Battlenet is a crutch for you D2 fanbois.  This internet-only version will be a travesty.

I don't understand this point of view at all.  You can still play sitting next to somebody.  The internet works better now than it did in 1996.

[Merusk]

Yeah, how dare you want to interact with actual people, you fogies.  Don't you understand how passe that is? Look at the kids, they don't bother talking to the people next to them because they can text over the intertubes!

 

[Azuredream]

Or, you know, logistics. My friends and I made our own passworded game and played together in the same room but it wasn't always possible to get together, so being on battle.net let us play together without having to be in the same place.

[Lantyssa]

Diablo came out when I was in college.  So I'm talking a dozen of us playing various games in the basement of the dorm at once.  That was a blast.

Being able to play with strangers on the internet is just not that interesting.  Nor is there a need to force me to play on the internet all the time.  It's not the end-all be-all, and anyone claiming it's the only way to play shouldn't be claiming anything more than it's the only way they like to play.  Stop trying to force your form of enjoyment upon other people.  That was my point.

[Azuredream]

It's not the end-all be-all

I agree, I just took exception to

This internet-only version will be a travesty

[Malakili]

Diablo came out when I was in college.  So I'm talking a dozen of us playing various games in the basement of the dorm at once.  That was a blast.

Being able to play with strangers on the internet is just not that interesting.  Nor is there a need to force me to play on the internet all the time.  It's not the end-all be-all, and anyone claiming it's the only way to play shouldn't be claiming anything more than it's the only way they like to play.  Stop trying to force your form of enjoyment upon other people.  That was my point.

Well, the need to be on the internet for a game all the time well established at this point for tons of games and tons of devs and tons of publishers, you can make a principled argument about it in general I think (and I have, and I would in this case as well, but its a separate discussion), but I don't feel like Diablo is any special exception.  It seems like the real distinction is single v. multiplayer, and there is no reason you can't play by yourself never interacting with a stranger once ever if you don't want to.  I always made my characters I planned on playing alone on battle.net anyway, just because it gave me the option to change my mind.

So, if you are upset about being forced to connect to the internet to play, thats one thing.  But being forced to connect to the internet to play doesn't mean that you must play multiplayer or with strangers.  It seems like two separate issues to me.  Both are legitimate, but they are separate.

[Minvaren]

I agree, I just took exception to

This internet-only version will be a travesty

I suppose it all depends on what the BNet lag is like in D3.  I only played D2 on BNet for an hour or two total before the lag deaths made me throw up my hands in disgust, but LAN play (even with people thousands of miles away) was perfectly fine.

[Der Helm]

I suppose it all depends on what the BNet lag is like in D3.  I only played D2 on BNet for an hour or two total before the lag deaths made me throw up my hands in disgust, but LAN play (even with people thousands of miles away) was perfectly fine.

?

Always thought that LAN stood for LOCAL area network ?!?

[Shrike]

Diablo came out when I was in college.  So I'm talking a dozen of us playing various games in the basement of the dorm at once.  That was a blast.

Being able to play with strangers on the internet is just not that interesting.  Nor is there a need to force me to play on the internet all the time.  It's not the end-all be-all, and anyone claiming it's the only way to play shouldn't be claiming anything more than it's the only way they like to play.  Stop trying to force your form of enjoyment upon other people.  That was my point.

Diablo was after my college years (though only just) and I played it both ways. I liked both. Back then I"d agree the LAN experience was better, but now with VOIP I'd say there's practically no difference (other than being able to convince someone else to go get your beer). I played Sacred 2 quite a bit on Live! and really saw no difference to playing Diablo over at a friend's house after work. I had fun. Can't really add much more than that.

Well, except that I generally didn't play with total strangers. I might be in games with them when I was testing builds (soloing in 8-player hell games--just because I could) or just felt like some quick mayhem. Though it was fun to jump into a game with some horribly overtuned bowazon or javazon and have all and sundry accuse you of cheating because they didn't understand how you could do the stuff you could do.

[Ironwood]

Once again we're ignoring the 'shit internet' demographic.

AGAIN.

[Ingmar]

Once again we're ignoring the 'shit internet' demographic.

AGAIN.

That demographic is getting awfully small and ignorable these days.

[Murgos]

Once again we're ignoring the 'shit internet' demographic.

AGAIN.

That demographic is getting awfully small and ignorable these days.

Or, rather, so large and ubiquitous that it's no longer noticeable.  Like a pile of excrement in the middle of a cow pasture.

[Minvaren]

I suppose it all depends on what the BNet lag is like in D3.  I only played D2 on BNet for an hour or two total before the lag deaths made me throw up my hands in disgust, but LAN play (even with people thousands of miles away) was perfectly fine.

?

Always thought that LAN stood for LOCAL area network ?!?

Let me rephrase : I was meaning to compare Open (hosted LAN or internet game) versus Closed (hosted on BNet) online options.  For me, the former was playable, the second was not.

[Musashi]

Yea pretty much.  Douchebags on the internet, etc.  Who cares.  There are also lots of people who aren't.  And frankly, "I'm not doing it because internet people are scary" is basically reverse agoraphobia.

And D2 offered actual content that you couldn't reach without a realm character.  I'm talking about uber-diablo and crazy shit like that.  I don't even remember how they summoned him anymore, but if I'm remembering correctly anyone could join the game and help fight him.  There was also a lot of other stuff like that.  It was all that stuff in the patch notes about 'new monsters and difficulties awaiting players on hell difficulty in realm games.'

So yea, there was more to multiplayer than just trading.

[Sjofn]

I'm not concerned about douchebags on the internet or anything silly like that, I just don't usually feel like playing with other people, because the second I add anyone besides me to a game, I am no longer completely dictating what I do and at what pace I do it, but instead have to give even the tiniest shit of what the other person might want to do, which STILL might be more of a shit than I am willing to give. If it's someone who I generally overlap with in terms of "what we want to do," it works out fine, but Random Internet Stranger might be one of those crazypants metagamers who thinks my build sucks and will cheerfully tell me so in order to "help" when I do not, in fact, care, or worse, someone even I think sucks and slows me down from my prefered pace (although going too fast annoys me, too).

It's less "strangers make me skeered" and more "strangers are strangers and I have no idea if our playing together will be a pleasant experience." You can be the nicest person in the world, and I might still hate playing with you for some entirely different reason, you know? At least if you're a douchebag, I don't also feel guilty about hating playing with you. 

[Malakili]

These are all fine and good arguments, but is there ANY evidence that Blizzard is actually forcing anyone to play with other people, let along strangers?  This discussion started with a post from Bashiok that said they wanted to use followers to get people used to the idea of having someone else around.  Thats kind of a far cry from raid or die, or something.  If you want to play alone I haven't seen a single indication that you can't. 

[Shrike]

My guess would be that it'll be like D2. If you feel like going it alone, just lock your game and have at it. That's what I normally did to farm for gear when I didn't want anyone muddying the water.

Since we're assuming, I"m willing to bet that with Blizz's newfound interest in social networking, D3 might very well be configurable in a manner similar to Live! You'll have a friends list and can create games locked to all but friends so random assholes don't infringe on your activities if you don't want them to.

[Sjofn]

These are all fine and good arguments, but is there ANY evidence that Blizzard is actually forcing anyone to play with other people, let along strangers?  This discussion started with a post from Bashiok that said they wanted to use followers to get people used to the idea of having someone else around.  Thats kind of a far cry from raid or die, or something.  If you want to play alone I haven't seen a single indication that you can't. 

It started there, sure, but then there was weird "single player Diablo was DOING IT WRONG and why would you ever!" and, well. Now you guys know.

[Ice Cream Emperor]

It's not the end-all be-all,

Was anyone actually doing that? I mostly played SP, but some people were wondering what was so great about MP beyond hardcore metagame. Even saying 'you're missing out' seems like a pretty soft sell to me.

[Typhon]

If they do an account-wide storage space (even if only available via micro-trans), I'll never play on the hard disk (SP).  Granted, i'll only ever be playing with people I know, but I need that shared storage... I NEED IT, MAN! <shakes/>

[Ice Cream Emperor]

Yep. If this game still requires muling I think I may lose what little faith I have left in game designers. Blizzard is supposedly the studio that gets shit right, so I look forward to a built-in D2Vault and account-wide storage space.

Inventory management is not fun, and it never has been fun, and it never will be fun.

[Musashi]

I'm not concerned about douchebags on the internet or anything silly like that, I just don't usually feel like playing with other people, because the second I add anyone besides me to a game, I am no longer completely dictating what I do and at what pace I do it, but instead have to give even the tiniest shit of what the other person might want to do, which STILL might be more of a shit than I am willing to give. If it's someone who I generally overlap with in terms of "what we want to do," it works out fine, but Random Internet Stranger might be one of those crazypants metagamers who thinks my build sucks and will cheerfully tell me so in order to "help" when I do not, in fact, care, or worse, someone even I think sucks and slows me down from my prefered pace (although going too fast annoys me, too).

It's less "strangers make me skeered" and more "strangers are strangers and I have no idea if our playing together will be a pleasant experience." You can be the nicest person in the world, and I might still hate playing with you for some entirely different reason, you know? At least if you're a douchebag, I don't also feel guilty about hating playing with you. 

It's cool.  However it might be worth considering that out of all the internet games out there, Diablo might be the one for people who feel as you do.  Because at least you CAN do your adventuring online by yourself and earn stuff that's trade-able when you feel like it.  And that way if you feel like it, you CAN do a few runs and sperg out on the metagame for a little while.  Very few people actually try to adventure or dungeon crawl with random strangers on the D2 ladder.  But you can pay somebody to PL the shit out of you so you can test out a new build.  But hey, now we're entering into respec waters.  Dangerous ground.  I know.  But anyway, internet douchebags on your own terms is the thing.

(Probably if you're reading this and considering making a comment about respecs, just don't.  We all know where people stand and have had the discussion several times.  Nothing good will come of it.)

[Ingmar]

There's nothing to discuss anyway, respecs already won the argument. 

This whole digression started with Reg's comment about SC2 forcing multiplayer down our throats; I still am not sure I understand where that is coming from, personally. Is it the battle.net account? The fact that there are a bunch of multiplayer achievements? I barely touched the multiplayer and felt like I got my money's worth. /shrug

[Reg]

It was being forced to sign on to battle.net that irked me really.  That and the fact that I lost interest even before finishing the single player campaign left me filled with buyer's remorse and bitterness. 

[Malakili]

To be fair, you actually can play Starcraft 2's campaign in offline mode, you just don't get achievements because they are tracked by battle.net or something.  As for signing in in general, well, if you count Steam I don't think I have had a game installed in the last 4 years that didn't require me to login to SOMETHING (Yea, there are counter examples, but whatever).  Yea, I'm not super happy about it, but that ship has sailed a long time ago, PC gaming requires logins these days.

[Musashi]

INGMAR!

[Malakili]

On another topic, 100 or so diablo 3 screenshots http://game.163.com/photoview/4KHR0031/20766.html#p=73M25J8I4KHR0031. 

[Ingmar]

INGMAR!

AAAAAAAARTHAS

[Ironwood]

To be fair, you actually can play Starcraft 2's campaign in offline mode, you just don't get achievements because they are tracked by battle.net or something.  As for signing in in general, well, if you count Steam I don't think I have had a game installed in the last 4 years that didn't require me to login to SOMETHING (Yea, there are counter examples, but whatever).  Yea, I'm not super happy about it, but that ship has sailed a long time ago, PC gaming requires logins these days.

Offline mode is buggy as hell and rarely works.  I suspect a lot of you don't actually KNOW this due to never really having to use it.  Speaking as our resident SHIT INTERNET spokesman, I can assure you this is the case. 

[Furiously]

I thought it was their copyprotection scheme...

[Malakili]

To be fair, you actually can play Starcraft 2's campaign in offline mode, you just don't get achievements because they are tracked by battle.net or something.  As for signing in in general, well, if you count Steam I don't think I have had a game installed in the last 4 years that didn't require me to login to SOMETHING (Yea, there are counter examples, but whatever).  Yea, I'm not super happy about it, but that ship has sailed a long time ago, PC gaming requires logins these days.

Offline mode is buggy as hell and rarely works.  I suspect a lot of you don't actually KNOW this due to never really having to use it.  Speaking as our resident SHIT INTERNET spokesman, I can assure you this is the case. 

I freely admit I've only ever used it 2-3 times, but as recently as a week or two ago I decided to start another run through the single player and was in offline mode and it worked fine.  If it doesn't work right consistently then it should be fixed.

[FatuousTwat]

Diablo came out when I was in college.  So I'm talking a dozen of us playing various games in the basement of the dorm at once.  That was a blast.

Being able to play with strangers on the internet is just not that interesting.  Nor is there a need to force me to play on the internet all the time.  It's not the end-all be-all, and anyone claiming it's the only way to play shouldn't be claiming anything more than it's the only way they like to play.  Stop trying to force your form of enjoyment upon other people.  That was my point.

Diablo was after my college years (though only just) and I played it both ways. I liked both. Back then I"d agree the LAN experience was better, but now with VOIP I'd say there's practically no difference (other than being able to convince someone else to go get your beer). I played Sacred 2 quite a bit on Live! and really saw no difference to playing Diablo over at a friend's house after work. I had fun. Can't really add much more than that.

Well, except that I generally didn't play with total strangers. I might be in games with them when I was testing builds (soloing in 8-player hell games--just because I could) or just felt like some quick mayhem. Though it was fun to jump into a game with some horribly overtuned bowazon or javazon and have all and sundry accuse you of cheating because they didn't understand how you could do the stuff you could do.

Diablo II came out when I was in highschool. A group of friends and I played the hell out of it on bnet, and I had a ton of fun. I pretty much never played with random internet people unless I was starting a new character and wanted someone to rush me.

[Malakili]

New video showing runestones:

The quick and dirty version of runes in D3 for those who don't know is that they are kind of like glyphs in WoW.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jewDFyHfvTE

[Paelos]

The demon hunter stuff abilities look even more ridiculous in action. We're firing grenades around with double crossbows? While I like the rest of the classes, that one just sticks out as fantasy geek wankery.

[K9]

I think this system looks pretty fun all in all