Home › Game Forums › Diablo 3
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
D3 Better suited as a game for Smart Phones and Tablets.
GrayGhost79
Member UncommonPosts: 4,775
in Diablo 3
I thought my biggest gripe with D3 would be the lack of PvP and the addition of RMT.
Sadly this turned out not to be the case. The game looks to be more simplistic than previous games in the series. While the graphics are definitely better they really aren't where they should be at this point in time.
All in all if this were a game I could download for $2-$5 on my phone would probably be worth it.
As a PC game for $50-$60 ... lol theres just to much thats just better out there.
In any case what do you think the chances of Blizzard making a port of D3 for tablets and smart phones are? Definitely would be worth playing on my phone for a few bucks.
Comments
Wait BLizzard has dropped its "When its Finished stance?"on products...
Activitions influence?
The game is awful.
People are just too afraid to admit it.
I'm positive it will be possible run on a tablet with a few "hacks".
Yeah, running it on a phone would be kinda cool i suppose, Would of probably generated abit more cash if it was muliplatform.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I agree the graphics look worse then tablet games running on tegra 2 and tegra 3 mobile processors. With tegra 4 coming out soon ( this summer) I could easily see it running on a new phone or tablet.
Transformer Prime would be a good choice.
Oh well with The Secret World and Guild Wars 2 coming out soon, i really do not have time for Diablo 3, it has not grabbed me like TSW or GW2 has.
Lolipops !
interesting point, not suprised they dumbed down the gameplay, suprised the graphics are as well
No pvp is the real deal breaker for me, imagine Starcraft 2 without it, all you would have is a boring super easy campaign.
Blizzard dont make games for adults, SC2 relies on the players to provide good gameplay, though no one else seems to agree, and it was worse there as strategy games should be stimulating, yet I was bored though as much of the campaign as I could stand. Blizzard cater to kiddies and the casual now, in WoW the PVE is so easy that, like in SC2 PVP is the only challenge apart from endgame raiding. This is no longer a well rounded gaming company.
Name them.
You mean name all the games that are better than a click to move game with extremely low end graphics and very basic gameplay?
You really want me to make that list?
Never played D1 or D2, I find D3 to be a decent game, I have to disagree with the negativity, game reminds me of a one I played several years ago, believe it was called Dungoun Siege. Plus graphics are fine on my comp.
If they put D3 on tablets or phones, I guess they would make more money, thats what buisnesses do.
Godz of War I call Thee
If the game came out as portable or 10 years ago, I might see the merit in it. but as it is: its really the most overhyped piece of trash game. the entire gameplay is just repeatively clicking on enemies.
the reality diablo fans can't see is that diablo today plays like a subpar low budget indy game, not a megabucks AAA title from one of the industries biggest companies.
My blog:
No, name point and click dungeon hackers that are better.
Iphone would be to small, but it would make a perfect $5 I-pad game. It would suit much better on that medium then on PC. it just feels and looks like Diablo 1, which gave me the same feeling as D2.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
what game company did you think was making this game? blizzard has never made games with cutting edge tech in mind.
wow can run on a pc made in 2000-2001 and looks older than that, SC2 looks like they just made better textures for everything and added a few bare minimum effects.
complaining about the graphics is one of the lamest nit picks ever when you look at their other games.
the game doesn't look that bad, and it is a overhead view game, what did you expect?
i would fault them if the game looked like crap if it was a 3rd person or first person game, but they are trying to stick to the spirit of the other games while attempting to make it playable by more people.
now just to halt the folks that might have the urge to jump on me for being some sort of "blizzard apologist". i hate the RMT, the online only and lack of real single player game and lan. i enjoyed the beta, but i haven't played the latest, but heard good stuff about it. i don't plain to pick it up first day though, i don't see it as being worth 60 bucks because of their choices on rmt, and forced internet connection.
Some would mention PoE.
Oh don't get me wrong, if it were just the graphics I wouldn't be complaining. It's the fact that everything about the game is so low end. Yes, I understand making it so more people can play, what I didn't expect is a tablet quality game getting released for PC at a whopping $50-$60.
My opinion is simply based on what we are getting for the price tag. Like I said I'd be praising the game if it were a $5 phone or tablet game.
Those are lagit complaints. I myself had issues with the iadea that I'm playing a single player game but have to be placed on a server. I also had an issue with the game freezing (as if from server lag) more often than not when a mob would pop out along with graphics (Such as them comming out of a wall or a door glowing and the mob appearing). I died twice because of the lag.
Diablo 1 came out in 96, and 2 came out in 2000...Those who were old enough then to really enjoy either of those games are much older now (16 years ago for diablo 1!!!) I really think people are remembering the games to be something more than what they really were.
What made diablo 1 and 2 so great was that they were something new and inovative (for the time). Diablo 3 is a game that is a repeat of games that were new and fresh 12 and 16 years ago...when gas only cost 1.50 a gallon... Here's a thought. Blizzard isn't targeting their 30something crowd. We're old and jaded. They are targeting what we were back when blizzard was getting started....the young and hip groups...The teens, tweens and 20 somethings. They are catering their games to that crowd.
And, honestly, I was dissapointed about no skill point distribution and the fact that there was no mana potions and that health potions were on cooldown....
Played the beta...I got bored of it after about 15 minutes or so...It isn't anything better than D3, except for it being free...and didn't really hold my interest after the first town. Torchlight 2 isn't out yet, and I doublt you've played any beta, so that also doesn't count...
seriously, if your gfx suck in d3, concider buying a new pc and setting it to max ^^
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Umm, so if you have it maxed with great FPs and it still looks like garbage ?
Lolipops !
So... I need a better PC?
i7 2600k
GTX 560 ti x2
60GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD
1TB Western Digital Black 7200rpm
16gb Gskills Ripjaws 1866
GIGABYTE GA-Z68A-D3H-B3 LGA 1155
and I'm playing it on Max... how much better does my computer need to be before this starts looking and playing like a $60 game?
actually it doesn't.
the atmosphere is awesome in this game with it's light effects and reacting surrounding to nearly everything you do.
the grass is moving back from powerfull moves,
small "critters" (rats and tombstones and so on) can be used to trigger for example chainlightning moves,
nearly every interior is destructable or can be interacted with, or even used to kill enemies
no idea how you guys can think d3's gfx suck, and in the same line praise torchlight 2 or sth like it.
if you have a handy that can play diablo 3 you should maybe bring it to the market, you could make money with it i'd say.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
i think the brig problem is. the simplisity and low end graphics. why are we paying for a AAA game? there cant have been all that much put into this game that it needs such a heavy price tag. hell most games dont even need a $60 tag on pc and 50 would have sufficed (lack of licencing and all) on consoles its needs due to licencing to the console manufacturers.
but in this game why couldnt it have been >$20 it sure feels like a cheap game.
Why focus on graphics alone when that is not the only gripe? I admit the game doesn't look bad, but by todays standards it's extremely low end. This is not a plus or a minus at this point, this is simply what is. I can and have overlooked low end graphics on many occasions, but when the game play warranted it. This is not the case here. You have the low end game play to go along with the low end graphics. This isn't even touching on numerous other issues.
Sorry but please quit trying to simplify the complaint to nothing more than a graphics gripe.
Hmm Torchlight 2 does not come across as a game trying to push graphics as a driving force like Diablo 3 attempts to. Boil it down it comes to gameplay, if the gameplay in Torchlight 2 is like Torchlight 1, then i have nothing to be worried about. Whereas, Diablo 3 has deformed its gameplay from Diablo 2 and therefore gets a fat goose egg from me.
If blizzard wants to hype its graphics but say they took a creative approach to an ugly mess thats there call but they will live or die by those statements.
Lolipops !