Zero Punctuation: Diablo 3

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

Magog1:
It's generally something ben fails to do. it's critic with 0 enlightenment, never watch a 0 punction with out ever playing the game first.

Forgive my ignorance, but isn't the point of watching a critical review of a game supposed to be to make certain you even want to buy the game in the first place?

Granted, I'd never base a purchase decision on what Yahtzee said to begin with, but the whole point of reading reviews or watching video reviews is to help decide whether or not to buy a game, because in an age of $60 default priced games in a bad economy, getting burned by a game that's bad hurts more than it used to. You seem to be implying that the only way to properly decide how good a game is....is to buy the game and play it yourself, which defeats the purpose of critics altogether.

Let's be honest (and this doesn't just address Blizzard fans who keep using this defense for D3, but rather EVERY fandom that I've seen use this defense): You don't need to buy a game to know that you're not going to like it. You don't. We live in an age where finding footage of a game to watch, or seeing a Let's Play is as easy as a YouTube search. Reviews for games are everywhere on the internet. And there are STILL places out there which allow you to rent newly released games for a couple days to test out a product that you're on the fence over. This notion that the only way to know "for sure" if you'll like a game is to buy it, usually at the whopping price of $60....it's just being dishonest.

Magog1:
Ben is the gaming, to what the daily show is to news. It covers the same material as the real thing, but don't expect to learn anything.

This analogy amuses me because the Daily Show, while a humor-focused show, is often better at telling the news than the supposed "experts" over on MSNBC or FOX, and I'd sooner turn to the Daily Show for reliable news coverage than either of the prior stated sources.

Just sayin'.

Bad Jim:

Just to clear this up.

http://diablo2.diablowiki.net/Diablo_Quests

The Butchers' quest shows up 2/3 of the time in single player. In multiplayer, the Butcher is always there, every single time. Maybe Grey preferred multiplayer.

Even so, the focus was on canadamus' single player experience, and aren't the Butcher and Skeleton King still completely optional in multiplayer? I wouldn't call them "main story" quests.
(I can hardly remember when I've played multiplayer, so I'm not 100% confident on that side of things.)

OffT: At least the new captchas are easier to read.

Grey Day for Elcia:
You always have to kill the Butcher in Diablo 1--it's a main story quest.

Wrong. The story quests in Diablo 1 are randomly picked, and while the Butcher quest appears in most playthroughs, it doesn't appear in all. I have gone through several D1 playthroughs without meeting The Butcher (as in, the moterf*cker didn't exist, and neither did that dying fellow outside of the Cathedral).

Caffiene:

HeallunRumblebelly:
They need to remain that integrity because of the RMAH.

My point was that the post Abedeus was responding to was asking the question "Why do they need it if the RMAH isnt being used". You cant answer the question of "why do they need it apart from the RMAH" with the response "because of the RMAH".

The restrictions and measures make some sense to protect the RMAH (although many question whether the RMAH is worth the effort), but somebody in the thread here mentioned a rumour that the RMAH was going to be delayed indefinitely because of player concerns. Somebody responded by asking in that case why they needed the always-online: the implication being that if they arent going to have the RMAH after all then their justification for needing always-online goes away.

At the end of the day, it's because blizzard-activision wants money, and your play experience matters little, especially in a non subscription based game o_o

Hope something keeps this game going, because I can't see myself playing this game in 2 months unless the pvp is incredible.

I actually think he let D3 off lightly.

canadamus_prime:
I could be wrong, but I think part of the idea of randomly generated dungeons is, besides replayability, is that your experience will be different than your friend's experience so you can stand around the water cooler comparing.

I am sorry but that is ridiculous.

"Hey Tom, what did you think of the Crypt Dungeon?"

"Well Bill, first I had to go left, then right, then right, then left."

"You don't say. Well I had to go Right, then left, then left, then right."

"Interesting"

"Quite"

Rafe:
Great funny review as usual. Are you going to review Lone Survivor sometime? I'd like to know what you think.

I'm still waiting for him to review El Shaddai. The Escapist advertised it, I want to know what the fuck it is in a five minute time span I already have planned.

Grey Day for Elcia:

canadamus_prime:

vxicepickxv:
If they made it at all like Diablo 2, then sometimes you won't even fight some bosses, or have some quests available, because they weren't generated. It does make for different games.

I remember on one playthrough of the first Diablo I didn't have to fight the Butcher.

You always have to kill the Butcher in Diablo 1--it's a main story quest.

The Butcher is mentioned as part of the lore and main story in Diablo 1. However, there was a random chance that you wouldn't see him in a given playthrough. My copy of Diablo 1 for the PS1 can verify this quite easily.

The same goes for the Skeleton King. He's mentioned in lore, as well, though I've met him less than 50% of my playthroughs.

Magog1:

Kermi:

trollpwner:

OK, but seriously, who plays Diablo for the story? Literally your only interactions with the world are clicking things to death and selling their trousers to the merchants. It's not like your character has any personality.

Which is kind of why I now feel compelled to go and play Diablo 2. I would play Diablo 1 but the version I actually have on CD stopped working about 3 versions of Windows ago. I'm hoping a pirated version of D2 might be more likely to run.

Ever watch the nazi parody on yahtzee? You know the one where the game rags on Ben for whining about plot instead of "is the game fun."

It's generally something ben fails to do. it's critic with 0 enlightenment, never watch a 0 punction with out ever playing the game first.

This is a decent point, but I have no intention of playing Diablo 3 - I'm not basing my choice to play or not play D3 on this or any other review. I'm going to play D2 because I vaguely remember enjoying it way back and kind of want to play it again.

I too find Diablo III to be a rather mediocre game. This sequel simply sells well because it rides the coattails of the previous installments all the way to the bank. I don't dislike Diablo III, I'm just not wowed by it. I mean... it took them six years or so to make the game. Why are the graphics so crappy? Why are half the skills useless? Why is it that every piece of loot I find is ten levels beneath me?

Good voice acting, though. Gotta give Blizzard props for that, even though the story is lame to begin with. Yes, people play this game for the hacky-slashy, but that doesn't mean that had to phone the whole story in.

CriticKitten:

Magog1:
It's generally something ben fails to do. it's critic with 0 enlightenment, never watch a 0 punction with out ever playing the game first.

Forgive my ignorance, but isn't the point of watching a critical review of a game supposed to be to make certain you even want to buy the game in the first place?

Granted, I'd never base a purchase decision on what Yahtzee said to begin with, but the whole point of reading reviews or watching video reviews is to help decide whether or not to buy a game, because in an age of $60 default priced games in a bad economy, getting burned by a game that's bad hurts more than it used to. You seem to be implying that the only way to properly decide how good a game is....is to buy the game and play it yourself, which defeats the purpose of critics altogether.

Let's be honest (and this doesn't just address Blizzard fans who keep using this defense for D3, but rather EVERY fandom that I've seen use this defense): You don't need to buy a game to know that you're not going to like it. You don't. We live in an age where finding footage of a game to watch, or seeing a Let's Play is as easy as a YouTube search. Reviews for games are everywhere on the internet. And there are STILL places out there which allow you to rent newly released games for a couple days to test out a product that you're on the fence over. This notion that the only way to know "for sure" if you'll like a game is to buy it, usually at the whopping price of $60....it's just being dishonest.

Magog1:
Ben is the gaming, to what the daily show is to news. It covers the same material as the real thing, but don't expect to learn anything.

This analogy amuses me because the Daily Show, while a humor-focused show, is often better at telling the news than the supposed "experts" over on MSNBC or FOX, and I'd sooner turn to the Daily Show for reliable news coverage than either of the prior stated sources.

Just sayin'.

You've watched over 100 zero punctuation episodes, you should already know the answer. You should know that Yahtzee constantly spoils entire plots and endings of the games he rants about. This is also the reason I have not even watched his screed: revelations video.

Well, that review completely lacked any substance at all...it was kinda funny, but totally uninformative.

The always online DRM was the nail on the coffin for me.

samus17:
Wait...

Yahtzee never played either of the other Diablo games?
Yahtzee didn't BEAT the extremely short campaign that is Diablo 3?
Yahtzee didn't turn on elective mode to use whatever spell in whatever category?

GOOD GOD MAN! I CANT DEFEND YOU ON THIS ONE!

So instead he doesn't "review" it and recieves 500,000 emails asking him why not.

Having played D1&D2, I can safely say that not having played the earlier games doesn't affect ones ability to review this.

Also, I didn't care for the beta of D3, I can't say I blame anyone for not finishing it, it's pretty boring and awful as a single player game.

Nitpick time, there's instanced loot in multiplayer, so people can't steal your awesome trousers.

Zenn3k:
Well, that review completely lacked any substance at all...it was kinda funny, but totally uninformative.

Have you ever thought to yourself "I really hope that Blizzard bring out World of Diablo, and make it still be isometric. That would be baller! Especially if it was FTP rather than subscription. I also hope that there's no single player."?

If so, then get the game. If not, don't get the game. It's "Diablo 3: MOAR DYABLAH!" and there's no effective single player.

Mygaffer:

canadamus_prime:
I could be wrong, but I think part of the idea of randomly generated dungeons is, besides replayability, is that your experience will be different than your friend's experience so you can stand around the water cooler comparing.

I am sorry but that is ridiculous.

"Hey Tom, what did you think of the Crypt Dungeon?"

"Well Bill, first I had to go left, then right, then right, then left."

"You don't say. Well I had to go Right, then left, then left, then right."

"Interesting"

"Quite"

I was more referring to the fact that it's not just the dungeons that are randomly generated, but the events, quests, and monsters within them as well.

canadamus_prime:
I could be wrong, but I think part of the idea of randomly generated dungeons is, besides replayability, is that your experience will be different than your friend's experience so you can stand around the water cooler comparing.

None of it really matters in normal mode, because even if you're a newbie to the Diablo franchise, you have plenty of time to learn to play your class (as Yahtzee mentioned).

But keep in mind that it's not only the dungeons themselves that are randomized. In the harder modes the random enemies are more than one-trick ponies, and have multiple abilities, so it's possible to get an enemy that just happens to be the evilest combo for your class. It's not uncommon to find a blue or yellow enemy group that's harder than a boss.

OT: Oh Belial. Ohhhhhhhh Belial. Just even mentioning him is making me rage.

Fair criticisms to make, and Yahtzee definitely could have made his review a lot worse. It feels really lukewarm to me, the same way that a lot of my friends found the game. (Confession time, I haven't played a Diablo game before now, so I'm having a really good time. Everyone else who played D2 doesn't like D3.)

But yeah, the random loot generator thing gets annoying. It takes me 6-10 levels to find a decent piece of armor that actually has stats for me.

I kind of half expected he would pick a wizard, since he played a mage in WoW. I haven't tried witch doctor yet, but all the people I hear who've tried it say it's a pretty boring class when you just sit back and let your minions do all the work. Personally, I enjoy demon hunter, because when I'm not spamming arrows and seeing everything explode in a brilliant cascade of blood, I'm running around to the Benny Hill theme, trying to get away from mobs only to attract more mobs.

the fact that yahtzee, a professional game critic didn't discover the existance of elective mode until after he had already written and recorded his reveiw speaks a lot about blizzards attention to detail and design effort in D3, in that its severly lacking.

DVS BSTrD:
But Yahtzee, changing out the pants is the part of dungeon crawlers that really drawers you in!

Leave. Now. Get out of my internet. That was physically painful.

canadamus_prime:

Well I can't speak for Diablo III as I haven't played it yet, I'm still debating on whether of not I should buy it. However I have played the previous 2 Diablo games and in those 2 it didn't really seem to make much of a difference to be honest.

Don't! Don't be suckered in by Blizzards wiles. Join me, my brother, and our fellow lovers of Diablo 2 in the promised land! Join us in Torchlight 2!

.........

Okay, ridiculous hyperbole and melodrama aside, in all seriousness I do recommend Torchlight 2 instead.

Besides, even if you end up NOT liking it, it's only twenty bucks. Hurts a hell of a let less than realizing your paid sixty bucks for a game you hate.

I play D3 and is ... well it's ok i guess. It still has that addictive "gotta catch 'em all" formula, and I enjoy the "story" (mainly meaning the voiceacting) more than D2. But still it's a game I play for 2h a week max... It gets boring pretty fast.

Can't understand all the arguments about the review though. It's zero punctuation after all, it's comedy, not game journalism. Altough I have to say I did not laugh as much as with other reviews from Yahtzee...

forced to play single player online is ridiculous...

That was the most uninspired ZP I have seen so far ...

A collection of internet QQ without research, coupled with his problem for being addicted to Blizzard games and hating himself for it. Weak.

I give props to "carpet bombing" joke, that was inspired. :)

Ever hear of a book called "beyond the deepwoods"? As long as you read the first chapter first, and the last chapter last, you can read all the intermediate ones in whatever order you feel like, and it'll basically make the same amount of sense. It's still a really good book.

Witch Doctor is disco mode.
SO MUCH STUFF GOING ON!
It is very confusing, I have to say.

Ah, yes, the elusive elective mode. A friend of mine managed to miss it as well and was completely flabbergasted when I told him about it. This is why I always look through every option available before starting a game.

yundex:
You've watched over 100 zero punctuation episodes, you should already know the answer. You should know that Yahtzee constantly spoils entire plots and endings of the games he rants about. This is also the reason I have not even watched his screed: revelations video.

You're going to have to really stretch the definition of the word "spoiler" to make it work in the way you're trying to make it work.

And I do mean REALLY stretch it. For the record, "spoiler" generally doesn't refer to things that are stupidly obvious, like "Diablo appears in Diablo 3". Giving an explanation for how Diablo is resurrected in Diablo 3, despite managing to get his SOUL destroyed in Diablo 2, WOULD be a legitimate spoiler. (btw, still waiting to find a good explanation for how the hell that works at all that isn't a giant middle finger to D2 fans) >_>

But I'm willing to hear this out. Tell me, can you please provide multiple examples of ZP reviews in which Yahtzee spoiled the entire ending of the game while reviewing it? And I do mean the ENTIRE ending, not just pointing out one or two plot points that show up halfway through the game and continue to have an impact on the game's finale. I think the last I can recall is Kane and Lynch 2....and did you really need Yahtzee to tell you not to buy that game?

Besides, even if your assertion were as true as you try to make it sound (and I'm not convinced it is), your point still really doesn't dismiss the rest of the post you quoted, in which I also stated that there are lots of other ways to get information about a game, too. So....

Best ZP review I've seen in months!

samus17:
Wait...

Yahtzee never played either of the other Diablo games?
Yahtzee didn't BEAT the extremely short campaign that is Diablo 3?
Yahtzee didn't turn on elective mode to use whatever spell in whatever category?

GOOD GOD MAN! I CANT DEFEND YOU ON THIS ONE!

I was thinking the same thing. His charm can only get him out of so many shenanigans.

I'm a little let down, but you brought out some excellent points. I thought the cheesy character designs would also have obtained honorable mention. The story was better than I thought, but when all I was getting was fanboys trying to outdo each other with speculation, you can only imagine how low the bar was set.

Randomly generated terrain just means that my explored maps never save when I leave the game. I no longer see any point to completely exploring a map since it won't stay explored when I leave the game.

Abedeus:

I still don't get why people who didn't play any of the sequels review THIRD game in the series. That's like reviewing Lord of the Rings: Return of the King without watching or reading previous chapters.

OK, take issue with this. Ignoring the fact the rest of this post could be summarised "With I like Blizzard and Diablo 3 and this is why everyone who dislikes it is wrong", claiming you can't review a game without playing the games that came 12 years before it is just bias at it's highest.

If someone posted in Yahtzee's Skyward Sword review that his opinion was invalid because he didn't play A Link to the Past on the SNES, you wouldn't accept that argument for shit, even LESS if it was to the first Zelda game from 86. From what I remember of Diablo 2, Diablo's soul gets destroyed at the end, I don't recall that being explained in Diablo 3? The storylines aren't even sequential as far as I can see, so it's really not like the Lord of the Rings example.

Defend the game you like all you like, but claiming you have to play the preceeding games is fanboyism at it's highest. I know because -I- have that response to some of these ZP reviews, but I stop myself from saying it.

CriticKitten:

yundex:
You've watched over 100 zero punctuation episodes, you should already know the answer. You should know that Yahtzee constantly spoils entire plots and endings of the games he rants about. This is also the reason I have not even watched his screed: revelations video.

You're going to have to really stretch the definition of the word "spoiler" to make it work in the way you're trying to make it work.

And I do mean REALLY stretch it. For the record, "spoiler" generally doesn't refer to things that are stupidly obvious, like "Diablo appears in Diablo 3". Giving an explanation for how Diablo is resurrected in Diablo 3, despite managing to get his SOUL destroyed in Diablo 2, WOULD be a legitimate spoiler. (btw, still waiting to find a good explanation for how the hell that works at all that isn't a giant middle finger to D2 fans) >_>

But I'm willing to hear this out. Tell me, can you please provide multiple examples of ZP reviews in which Yahtzee spoiled the entire ending of the game while reviewing it? And I do mean the ENTIRE ending, not just pointing out one or two plot points that show up halfway through the game and continue to have an impact on the game's finale. I think the last I can recall is Kane and Lynch 2....and did you really need Yahtzee to tell you not to buy that game?

Besides, even if your assertion were as true as you try to make it sound (and I'm not convinced it is), your point still really doesn't dismiss the rest of the post you quoted, in which I also stated that there are lots of other ways to get information about a game, too. So....

Mass effect 3, spoiled the final mission mission. And SCREED brotherhood, which I finished before watching. I didn't actually mean that ENTIRE endings were spoiled, bad choice of words. But they're spoileriffic enough for me and many others. My only point is that you do not watch Zero Punctuation to determine weather or not you want to buy a game, I do not care about the rest of your post or diablo 3, which is why I did not and will not address it.

Jas0913:
It's a shame Yahtzee didn't play it through until the end. The final boss fight was so anticlimactic and the ending comes close to mass effect 3 bad. I was really looking forward to him bashing on that part.

People said this about Borderlands as well, but it's because they don't understand the game.

When you are assessing how good the last boss of a trouser-hunt is, you don't look at the fight itself, or the design of the boss, but whether it dropped good trousers.

Great review and all, but...

Thanks for all the pictures of the spiders. I really didn't need to sleep tonight, I was planning to spend all my time nervously twitching around everytime I get an itch.

Grospoliner:
You can bind any attack to any key. You have to find the option in the gameplay menu. If you'd bothered to explore the menu you would have found this option. Also loot drops are set up so that only the player that they drop for can collect them. You'd have found this out if you'd actually played a single game of multiplayer and watched an object for all of 3 seconds.

I have to ask Yahtzee, did you actually even play this game? Or did you run through half a level on someone else's computer and then decide to post this?

Yes you have to log into the battle.net server to play, no you don't have to play multiplayer. There's a button in the goddamn menu that specifically says Open Game to Public.

Finally, equipping weapons INCREASES YOUR ATTACK REGARDLESS OF THEIR USE. This means that giving someone a big shiny sword, still makes your little spider more powerful. You'd know this too if you'd ACTUALLY BOTHERED TO PLAY THE GAME.

For shame. For shame.

Indeed. And all of these things are negatives.

You should not have to go into the menus and hunt for an option to allow you to change skills for each button. It should be an inherint feature. So this is negative (the game never tells you to do this).
You have to be on battle.net to play, which cause lag and server issues for a game that is a single player only game for many people, and the game is not marketed as an MMO.

Equipping weapons does increase your attack, yes. But this is a pretty stupid mechanic. Why would my zombie-dogs become more powerful when I have very sharp knife? Non-melee attacks being affected by your knife is absurd, and makes the game pretty odd. This is what Yatzee is refering to here. I think he understands how it works, he just doesn't like it. And neither do I, as a matter of fact.

And for the final point, normal being so easy makes the game boring. If I have to use 5-8 hours to play through the game on normal before I can get to the "real" game, why whould I want to play through the exact same game again?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here