Mar 15th 2012 10:51AM @Deadalon Well, buying a year of WoW JUST to get D3 is a bad call, but getting D3 free if you are a WoW player already isn't really. A lot of people are in the latter category.
Buying a year sub just for the purpose of getting Diablo 3, if you aren't planning on playing wow, would be pretty silly though.
Mar 13th 2012 9:02AM @Kave You realize the 'not so massively' section is specifically for multiplayer games that aren't MMOs right?
Mar 12th 2012 12:18PM Basically, always balance for PvE. I don't think MMOs are ever viable as dedicated PvP games. Sure, it can be an aspect of the game, and it can be fun...but it's a genre that can never provide one of the most key elements of a pvp experience: a level playing field.
Unless it's something where you enter an arena and suddenly everyone is issued the same set of gear and is exactly the same, there will always be biases in the basic starting field of pvp in mmos. Games that succeed as pvp focused games (RTS games, moba type games, FPS) all offer a relatively standard starting point. MMOs are too based on differing forms of progression (gear, ship parts, whatever) that the playing field can never be truly balanced.
Mar 10th 2012 7:39AM Not exceptionally surprised, and not really that upset about the news. Diablo was never about pvp to me, and it was the feature I cared least about in D3. If I have the choice between D3 with pvp or getting the game earlier, I'd absolutely go with the earlier release. They can patch it in later just fine, especially in a game where everyone is going to be spending almost all their initial time in the PvE component.
Not exactly sure why the backlash, I'd think people would want the core game faster, and have the extras added in later. Then again, I'm sure the same people complaining would also have raged if the article title was "Diablo 3 delayed again in order to fit in PvP by launch"
Mar 1st 2012 9:03PM @Space Cobra It worked in FFXI, having mixed servers. My linkshell had both Japanese and western members. The auto-translator went a long way, and we had enough players that spoke both languages to facilitate things as well.
I don't see any reason it can't work. It could even add some flavour to the universe. Why would even human speak English anyway, when they've been supposedly separated for so long?
Mar 1st 2012 8:58PM @Calfis Sorry, I probably used the wrong word. I meant perhaps...non-directly competitive? Your example is still basically competitive, even if it's being cooperative to attain that goal. I meant like in something like FFXI, where there was really no direct competition between players (okay, on the market and in terms of claiming a territory for your country) it worked really well here.
You couldn't be a jerk on a server, because if you were, nobody would play with you, making the game unplayable at that time. The challenge was often paying attention to what other members in your group were doing, not just yourself, so you could probably chain skills and magic. That environment, combined with being easily accessed on consoles, was what continues to make FFXI pretty popular here.
I'm not sure if the highly competitive nature of EVE would appeal to players here, especially since it's going to be PC-only (I can only assume), which is a bit more of a niche market here. I could be wrong, I'd assume CCP has done their market research. Though I'd have expected Microsoft to do the same before failing with the 360 over here so badly.
My apologies for being unclear.
Mar 1st 2012 12:49PM There was a lot I wanted to like about Wakfu. The tactics-type gameplay is great. The art style is great, and the setting is pretty awesome. However, the world is...an empty grindfest. There's no lore or quests outside the starting/tutorial zone, it's just 'hey, go grind til you max level and then...do stuff'. Once upon a time maybe that was okay, but I thought MMO design has developed a lot since then
Mar 1st 2012 12:42PM I dunno how well it'll do here, but will remain to be seen. A lot of the MMOs that have done particularly well here have been primarily cooperative in focus (like FFXI) which...EVE couldn't be any further from. Perhaps it'll fill a niche here for sociopaths as well, but I'm not so sure.
It'd be nice to play in Japanese if I ever decided to get into it at least.
Mar 1st 2012 12:40PM @drunkingamebar Using youtube as a metric is...well, not particularly accurate for about anything.
It's been 11 years since D2, that does not mean D3 has been in development since the day D2 shipped LoD.
Really, it's just business as usual. It's how companies work, they are out there to make money, not to give people jobs or make people happy. If they find a way to do with 2 people what they used to do with 4...they'll do it. When Blizzard starts firing large quantities of developers, then it'll be cause for concern about the future of the company.
Feb 28th 2012 5:50AM @Dunraven Doubt it'll be a dud. For whatever reason, people here seem to often think that Blizzard can do nothing but wrong and will only ever release failures moving forward, but in the real world...that's not quite the case.
D3 has added a lot of polish to a genre where there's often not a whole lot you can do. It refines it, and opens it up to a much wider audience, while still having the trappings that make things fun for the more 'hardcore' player (like hardcore mode itself). It'll do pretty well I imagine, if not better than D2, simply because it is a lot more accessible I feel, from my time with the beta.
MoP - Hard to say, nobody has really had any real hands on time with much of it.
HotS - An expansion for one of the most defining esports out there (after maybe Brood War itself)? Yeah, it'll do fine. Heck, it'd probably 'do fine' if it didn't even sell a single copy in the West.
I never got all the doom and gloom forecasting the end of companies like Blizzard or Apple, outside of the usual 'I want to hate what's popular' type of mentality.