Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Diablo II: Lord of Destruction 135

Posted by Hemos from the i-volunteer dept.
Blazemonger writes "There's a story from IGN on Yahoo! talking about Blizzard recruiting for the upcoming expansion beta test. " I just filled out my form - have you? And I'd just like to reiterate my willingness to beta-test. Blizzard. I'm willing. So's CowboyNeal.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Diablo II: Lord of Destruction More

Diablo II: Lord of Destruction

Comments Filter:

  • Re:Whoo hoo! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    What about Linux isn't beta?
  • The game really has nothing to offer in terms of a challenge... click until they're dead, and the faster you click (this also includes multiplayer, which has the additional suckiness factor of lag) the better you do. Really. I've played through the Normal mode, got bored really quickly in Nightmare, but dutifully finished it, and played Hell mode just for the, uh, hell of it, and was extremely disappointed (I mean, I've had peons drop way better items than I got from Diablo after killing him...). The only thing you'll find different after the first episode in Normal is somewhat different monsters, more of them, and a larger variety of weapons.

    Plain and simple, it's an action game, an iso-shooter. And to add insult to injury, it's still very much a find-key-and-open-doors type of game. You run around completing straight-forward quests, and progress to the next one in an extremely predictable, linear manner. Anyone who thinks Diablo is an RPG would be sorely mistaken and does great injustice to the genre.

  • As said by others, Diablo is a totally different beast from FPS like Unreal. I heard on the radio recently that videogames stimulate the brain in the same way cigarettes do. That would explain my cravings for Diablo and Fallout Tactics!

    It's all about being rewarded for what, on the surface, is a repetitive behaviour. Like real life work, but more control, and better rewards.

    As long as you don't sink into the "it's only a game" funk, it'll keep you happy as a drug.

    --
  • See this just pisses me off because I have been beta testing games since the early sierra days. The games are fun and all, but finding their holes and bugs, and knowing that I have a knack for breaking things people put before me is the awesome part. I feel as a consumer happy that I can draw up excellent bug reports to see a game come out in the end better for it.

    If it spoils your enjoyment of the end product, then call yourself weak for not being able to wait for an end product.

    This is why I like beta test screens and allow a general public technology test near the end.

    Its friday, and I wanna go home!
    -M-
  • Bullfrog uses you slappers for beta testing. There are a slew of game related companies that support the EU region.

    On the total end of the stick, like anyone cares if someone can't participate in a 'beta' test.. You gonna cry for me? I'll play the violin.

    Ooh I'm a stinker today..let me out!
    -M-
  • Ahhh! Holy sh*t you talked about NWN hehe.. I got lucky during that time period, AOL messed up my account and I got all the hours I wanted for free.. then they had an issue with a player name and deleted my account.. was cool of them.. its ok though.. I got mine. hah..

    These people have to realize that games are mocks of life.. People are stupid and cowlike in general.. There are those of us who know how to play a game and dominate it, in teamplay we are leaders or executioners, in solo we are fiesty as hell.

    I play to win, I rally a team to dominate.. I get mad as hell at team killers.. oh I hate societies rejects..

    I still play a MUD from occassion.. Still have wiz chars on a few of the top ones (Batmud anyone? ;) ) I've helped run a slew of Mush's through the years those rock for RP..

    Hey, and I'm 6'3, 205lbs, 7%bf.. You really wouldn't think I am who I am..

    The world is cool, games are an extension of our imagination and I can't wait for the time to create my own corp to add to the bounty.

    Peace,
    -M-
  • Because Nethack is several orders of magnitude more complex than diablo? And there would be a ridiculous number of graphics to make?

    And what's this fascination with 3D? An isomorphic view is much better for a game like this, where it is important to be able to see all around you. With a fixed view, you might as well make it 2d, since then you can make the graphics as detailed/pretty as you want.
  • It's not a very honest question when you imply a hypocrisy exists without any substantiation. Especially since there is no way anyone here actually knows.

    From my limited personal experience, I'd say that few people who believe video games should be less violent actually buy violent video games. The mentality seems to be "I don't like violent video games, so neither should you." Though I won't say this is a general rule.

  • Everytime we see a post from Taco that contains a link to a QuickTime video we hear him whining "Of course, it doesn't work in Linux so I can't see it." Yet, whenever there's an article about Diablo Taco is right there chiming in "Oh I can't wait. Oh Diablo2 is great, I can't stop playing."

    I can't believe I just noticed this... I just lost about a metric ton of respect for CmdrTaco. Not because he uses Windows (hell, I still play Baldur's Gate), but because he pretends he doesn't when he feels like sounding righteous.

    Yes I know this was posted by Hemos, but just do a /. search for Diablo and you'll see what I mean about CmdrTaco.

    This is not meant to be flamebait or a troll... just the truth. If I'm wrong please correct me.

  • FYI... Diablo 2 was up around 3 million copies sold last I heard.

    Check out www.lurkerlounge.com. Sure seems to be an awful lot of strategy discussion going on for a game with no strategy... (grin)
  • Blizzard may be known for eye candy and quality game play, but they are NOT known for quality programming. Their code base is a serious mess. Given that they reused (cut-n-paste, not OOP) a lot of Diablo 1 source they probably couldn't get higher resolutions working properly.
  • Or complain about QuickTime movies because he "can't watch them" without a Linux player.
  • >Why is it so hard for a veteran gamehouse like Blizzard to make even a good (3D, please?) graphic version of Moria, Angband or Nethack, goddammit?!

    Check out Falcon's Eye [www.hut.fi]. From the site:


    Falcon's Eye (working title) is a mouse-driven interface for NetHack that displays the game in high-res, isometric, light-source shaded graphics, yet retains all of the game features. The new interface eases many tasks; for example, there's an 'autopilot' for long movements, and tooltips to describe the many objects and creatures in the game.


    And a screenshot [www.hut.fi] or two [www.hut.fi].

  • Re:Wrong (Score:1)

    by ddt ( 14627 )
    Actually, the Diablo franchise sold 2.75M copies in 2000. Diablo was designed after Nethack. I still play Nethack today, roughly 12 years after I played my first game. Nethack has a lot of problems, but it is today still a *very* challenging game to win without cheating, and every game is quite different, even if you use the same character class.

    People take for granted that most of Diablo's levels and magic items are randomly generated. This is a big deal. No other major games are doing random level generation by default, and few competing RPG's use randomly-generated magic items.

    I believe that randomly generated quests are a plausible next step. In the future, I believe it will be possible to create your own character classes and that you will have clever, dynamic options for rendering of these custom classes. For instance, an 18-strength character will have a beefier musculature than a 17-strength character, and you will be able to see the difference. It is not hard to imagine a scale for charisma (bad hair, bad complexion, bad teeth, nasty facial expression that morphs smoothly up to perfect hair, perfect complection, charming facial expression, etc), or for dexterity (when doing your IK to get hand from point A to point B, dexterity could create an algorithmic flourish).

    I agree that Diablo 2 gets tiring from the click-kill RSI-inducing user interface, but this is a user interface and AI issue that I think is solvable. For one, Diablo 2 did not allow the user to queue targets. This would not only make attacking simpler but would improve the multiplayer experience for people playing over slow, lossy links.

    The Diablo games have short-comings, but it is the only modern game franchise I see pushing the limits of dynamic content generation, I think it has a lot of room to grow, and I wish it well.

    I believe Blizzard's one major mistake is that they profess to be abandoning 2D engines. 3D engines have a consistent track record of not staying in the PC Data Top 10 lists anywhere near as long as the evergreen 2D engines. 3D PC engines are notorious for being flaky if you use a driver feature the driver author didn't expect to be heavily used. I believe that most strategic and RPG-ish PC titles, even today, should be 2D, because it makes market sense, the user gets a more consistent experience, and it gives the coder explicit, direct control of every pixel. There is room for 3D games, but the market is not as broad a reach because frankly, Microsoft botched the delivery of D3D and couldn't keep it simple, and the 3D accelerator IHV's flailed trying to add unique display features to their chips.

    Surprisingly, Fallout Tactics - which was just released - is the first PC title I've played that used anti-aliased sprites. The result is gorgeous, and it works on every platform perfectly. When we did Abuse, we added dynamic lighting, an effect that wasn't terribly hard to do, but for some reason hadn't graced PC scrollers before, perhaps because someone thought it was difficult to use a lookup table to shade one palettized colour into another. It wasn't that hard, the effect was dramatic, and it worked on every platform.

    There is a lot left to explore, and I think people forget that the power and grace of a modern computer is that it's a general purpose processor. In other words, it's always going to be slower than an ASIC (such as a 3D accelerator), but you will be able to enjoy your own, custom, unique, pixel-accurate effects.

  • I would fall asleep playing, wake up, and play some more.

    Ha, that's so funny and true its sad. Its also part, I think, of why it's getting harder to sell games to adults. I know I still love video games, but I just can't justify spending 40 hours a week playing/learning them (or god forbid 120 hours like I used to). Today's games all brag about how they have "80 hours of play time" -- well, damn that pretty much guarantees I won't play it because I know going in I don't have that much time to spend.

    I played Diablo 2 for a week straight, every night, then thankfully I forgot the disk at my brother-in-law's house and haven't played since. I remember having a great deal of fun playing, yet somehow my life does not feel less full since I stopped.

    It's nice to play a good RTS or something every now and then, because you can play for just an hour (or three) and stop without having just "one more level"...

    ---------------------------------------------

  • Timezones - Read the FAQ (Score:4)

    by Kris Warkentin ( 15136 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @04:38AM (#311346) Homepage
    The main purpose of the public beta is to stress test their servers. Therefore they want people in more or less the same timezone so that they will mostly come on during the same general window.

    *sing* I'm a karma whore and I'm okay....
    I work all night and I post all day
  • A minor, even offtopic point...CS is far from dead. More people play CS today than UT and Q3A combined. According to gamespy stats, anyway.
    True, it may suck a bit more, but it's far far from dead.
  • I just wanted to say that we non US/Canada would be testers should be given the chance to work around this time difference. I know many who would be prepared to play games though the night!

    Why? Why should you be given the chance to work around this? It's not like beta-testing is a right.
    Blizzard wants to make the beta small and hit their servers fast and furious. They also want to limit the number of people who have access to the beta. Taking 2500 people from all over the world would probably not give them quite as good an idea as 2500 people from one region. Furtheremore, just saying "Well *some* of us could work around that" doesn't work because frankly, they can't require that you log on certain times of the day. The easiest way for them to get a good estimate of the server usage etc is to do it this way.

  • Would have been great in 1998 (Score:4)

    by Markvs ( 17298 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @03:49AM (#311349) Journal
    The problem remains, though, that D2 is simply behind the times. I played D2 and was, well, bored. The game's graphics and interface is dated, and even the storyline is kind of dull.

    There's only so much you can do with a "click mouse until you kill it" game. Yes, it is better in multiplayer mode, and yes there are lots of improvements over D1, but it took so long to come out that it just can't compare to other games, such as Unreal. Heck, even Acheron's Call is close, and it has a much bigger (and more interesting) scope and multiplayer functionality.

    Just my $0.02.

  • I signed up for the D2 beta first time around, and lo, fun was had. So I rushed (metaphorically, of course) over to the signup, and... the dropdown for country of residence includes only the US and Canada. Okay, I was born in Toronto, but I live inDublin. Whassup? Obviously I'm not going to refer to blizzard as bastards; after all, they gave use not only Diablo 1&2 and Starcraft, but I don't want to compromise may slight chance of getting a beta again.
    But I'm worried.
    My windows box exists only for Diablo 2; if Bill is reading this, he should note that if I don't get a beta, Microsoft lose a toehold in another house. Not that I'm trying to apply pressure, you lovely blizzard people.
  • Actually, one of the features of the DII expansion is the ability to run at 800x600.

    On the other hand, I can't really say that a game like DII would benefit from an improved resolution in the same way that a FPS might. I mean, how much resolution do you really need to hack the living crap out of a blowgun-wielding pygmy?

    --

  • Firstly, I won't even bother griping about the fact that registration to sign up for the beta test of an expansion pack of a MS-Windows game is considered newsworthy at Slashdot.

    Secondly, I have to admit that I spent a good week and a half of my life dedicating most of my waking hours to Diablo 2, ending with my uninstalling the game in disgust and never playing it since. A number of reasons:

    • The game had the potential to be really cool, and just didn't follow through. I bought the game after spending a couple of hours playing it (offline) at a friend's house. I'm a longtime fan of Roguelikes and classic computer RPGs, and it looked like D2 had a lot to offer - an interesting storyline, NPCs to talk to, a nicely detailed character creation system, and dungeon crawls & combat that required a bit of thought and tactics. Well, that was my initial impression. After actually sitting down and playing the thing for a day or two, I found the illusion of depth was deceptive, and after a while the whole experience reminded me of nothing more than a bigger & badder Gauntlet - which would be fine, if it were done well in other regards.
    • Blizzard's dedication to being a mass-market success just isn't my style. I DO like the fact that they place a fair bit of emphasis on production value (polished-looking interface, competent voice acting), but I don't like how they design their games to be marketted to the lowest common demoninator -- they remind me a lot of Hasbro in that regard. I prefer games that take me a while to get into, and are still surprising me with interesting nuances months later.
    • Games with frequent patches and rules revisions are very frustrating, espescially when they affect characters that people have put a lot of time into developing. I can understand that a company may be under pressure to fix certain exploits and bugs that ruin the online experience for everyone, but when it radically changes the way a skill or spell works, it's just annoying, and a sign that the company needs to have a bigger & better beta test, so such wrinkles get caught before they get released to the general public.
    • D2 was way too short and easy! It took me probably about 30 hours of play to get to the final battle with Diablo, but by that time I had replayed most of the quests MANY times. I'm not a super fanatic game-player, nor am I usually very gung-ho about beating large games, so if a guy like me can see all that an RPG/exploration game has to offer within a week or so, there's not enough game.
    • D2, technologically speaking, is one of the poorest & sloppiest titles I've ever seen. 640x480 resolution only? WTF? On top of that, the OpenGL drivers wouldn't work at all initially on my system, until one of the patches "fixed" them so they would only crash every 30-60 minutes. The software drivers were much more stable (only crashed once or twice a day), except for a lovely little bug that would cause my system to freeze 100% of the time when I tried to enter the final battle with Diablo in Act IV. I probably could have spent a few more hours troubleshooting it or waited for another patch, but by that point I had seen all the game really had to offer, and pretty much gave up in disgust. (the system in question, by the way, is a PIII500, TNT2 video card, 192MB RAM, major-brand components, so I don't think it was choking on the system requirements...)

    Ah well, I'm sure some people will enjoy the D2 expansion, if only the folks at Blizzard whose bank accounts are fattened by it.

    As for me, I'll probably log a couple of hours this weekend playing Heroes of Might & Magic III (still haven't gotten tired of it, and haven't even tried any of the expansions), Test Drive Le Mans (Best. Console Racer. Ever. (DC)), and Go (the board game, since it gets me the heck away from the computer, and makes me use my brain).

  • Rant (Score:4)

    by chabotc ( 22496 ) <(chabotc) (at) (gmail.com)> on Friday April 06, 2001 @04:12AM (#311353) Homepage
    I'm sorry but i have to include this rant in the discussion.

    WHY do game publishers hate europe? Every time a beta cycle is started, you have to be located in the US of A (and sometimes canada) to be able to apply. Do these people think we can download? We don't buy games? (asia + europe buys more games combined then the US).

    It so pisses me off to see all these US centric game companies, as if we dont make up a large percentage of their profits.

    I gues it's not bad enough we get the games weeks behind the US, we can't apply for beta programs either. Is this some f**king 3rd word country or something?!

    Sorry had to do that .. man US based companies can piss me off :)

    -- Chris Chabot
    "I dont suffer from insanity, i enjoy every minute of it!"
  • Like I said, maybe it's just me.

    But if expansion packs are news then I guess I should be submitting stories about the DooM and Quake maps I've been tinkering with.
  • I totally agree. Why is this modded as funny? Tragicomic would be better.

    --
  • *bite*

    If you want to troll, at least get your facts straight. Blizzard releases for both MAC and Winblows. Last time I counted, that were 2 operating systems, not one.

    Also, most Blizzard games are playable under Wine/WineX. The only thing that doesn't work well is Battle.Net support -- and it's coming.
  • While it is true that there are far better _strategy_ games (B&W rocks, btw), you can't simply dismiss D2 as a game without teamplay. Sure, you can beat the game all by yourself with your 31337 Lance-Barbarian. Just the same, it isn't much fun. Parties of 3 or 4 people are actually way more fun to play -- and strategies emerge. For example, if you play an Amazon together with a Sorceress, your strategy will be a lot different from, say, a Necromancer + a Paladin.

    As for newbies getting crushed ... Uhmm, have you actually played the game ? It's focus is _not_ Player vs. Player ... As a newbie, you usually get a lot of help from experienced characters. A lot of free stuff, too (and not the worst, either).

    24/7 playing just to be good ? It strikes me that you have never actually played the game. Yes, if you want to be number one in the ladder, you'll have to play in teams or 24/7. Nutcases, that. Yesterday I played a few hours, and the day before. Before that, I was on hiatus for two months. Still works fine.
    And, in all fairness, how long _do_ you have to play to get good at FPS games ? Quite some time to find your style ... Team games ? Well, come up with a winning strategy for Counterstrike when you are just starting -- and play against a good team. Oh. You get crushed ? Thought that wouldn't happen.
  • Hee... I just got this image of Strom Thurmand staring at a computer screen, shouting "Yes! I just got Corpse Explosion!"

    Oh gee thanks! Now I have to pick all these FruitLoops out of my keyboard!

    I don't have moderator points so I just gotta say +5Funny... that made my day. :^)

    Ender

  • You contradict youself here.

    >Just cause it sold a bunch doesn't mean anything.

    So sales != good game.

    >More and more people want something besides just hack and slash...

    And how do they vote? By BUYING the games, thats sales.

    Also by playing them. Thats why I said that there are 50K people playing on servers currently.
  • Yes, buy the game as normal and play on their server for free.

  • Wrong (Score:5)

    by GoofyBoy ( 44399 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @04:24AM (#311361) Journal
    >The problem remains, though, that D2 is simply behind the times.

    Diablo2 sold over a million copies. There are 50K players over 3 contenets playing. Behind the times? A good game doesn't have to be bleeding edge.

    >but it took so long to come out that it just can't compare to other games, such as Unreal.

    Unreal and Diablo2 are two totally different genres of games and you can't compare.

    >Heck, even Acheron's Call is close, and it has a much bigger (and more interesting) scope and multiplayer functionality.

    But you have to pay $10/month for Asheron's Call. Thats totally different.
  • Actually the gameplay of Diablo is one of the best things about it. Their interface is decent and intuitive. It's much less dull than many games because you often have to judge when to use this power or that power, and often do so creatively. Two characters of the same class could have completely different styles.

    CS is not dead. It has not died, it is not dieing. I have no idea where you got that bit of info. Maybe it's wishful thinking on your part. I still played after 1.0 (on hiatus now because of T2) and it was still the same basic game and still very fun.

    About Tribes... funny that very few of the people online actually use teamwork. No, T1 did well because it was nicely positioned and an excellent break from the standard FPS games. T2 is selling out because it is a sequel. Never underestimate the selling power of a sequel. Do you think B&W would be doing this well without Peter's name being dropped?
  • I didn't notice much of a drop in 1.0. But more significantly, I didn't notice much of a change in gameplay. It still plays much the same way, and teamwork is crucial.

    In Tribes, while I understand that teamwork helps alot, alot of people still don't do it. Also, there's an enormous rambo factor, a single player can be very hard to stop if he's skilled. Therefore, I'm not sure that teamwork is the primary appeal of the game. At least, not anymore, maybe it was.

    T2 is a different animal so far, let's hope it keeps going.

    As for Diablo 2, I don't know if you played it much, but the same class can have completely different spell sets. There are at least 2 paths of advancement for most of the classes.

  • <Oh well, i had to put SOMETHING in this article that was remotely Linux-based.>

    Why? Slashdot is News for Nerds. Stuff that matters. Not everything has to relate to Linux... and who modded that shit post up?

  • Diablo Beta Testing (Score:5)

    by Necroman ( 61604 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @03:52AM (#311365)
    Most people (me, myself, and I) are fans of Blizzard, and enjoy their games. And I think it is great that Blizzard does beta testings for their games, even if it is for them to stress test their servers, it opens it up to the public before it actually goes gold.

    Here is the problem I have with it. I beta tests Diablo 2 before its release. It spoils your enjoyment of the game. It's great and being able to play a game before anyone else, but when you play a game that is well (I think) for online play, and you are playing with suck a limited crowd in a beta, you will get burned out. As I did, when playing D2 beta, I played it so much, that when it came out, and I got a the final release of the game, I was already burned out. There was no enjoyment really left.

    Well, so I regestered for beta testing again, shoot me. I just love being able to say, "Ya, I am a beta tester, eat it!".

    Its not what it is, its something else.
  • Diablo 2 has been successfully run under Linux.. I wouldn't necessarily assume that Rob's playing it on a windoze box.
  • Too bad there isn't a Linux beta test :\
  • Waitaminute...what the heck am I talking about. Why would Blizzard beta test an expansion set when their original product has SOOO many bugs and ... lets just call them flaws. They should patch up diablo2 and get it working correctly before releasing another chunk of crap on top of it.

    Has
  • I bought Diablo 2 when it came out and played it happily for many weeks. Then one fateful day my roomate emerged through the front door media play bag in hand. "Ooh Ooh what's in the bag?!", I cried. "Everquest". After watching him wade trod around the MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER 3d universe for a couple hours, I was on my way to Media Play to get my copy. Life has never been the same since then. I lost my girlfriend. I lost my job. Hehe, not really, but I have logged well over 100 hours developing my character, and I've found it much more stimulating than Diablo 2 ever was. Instead of playing with 8 people at a time, you play with 1500. Not to mention that there are countless spells, monsters, zones, etc. I guess it's all just personal preference, but I've never once had any desire to play Diablo 2 since.
  • Ahh, so what you are saying is that since this isn't the type of game that you personally enjoy it is automatically dated and boring? Gee, and all this time I had no idea that you were the sole arbiter of game quality on the planet. Remind me to look you up next time I'm going to make a game purchase so I can make sure it lives up to your standards....

    The fact that you don't like it doesn't automatically make it a bad game.

    Kintanon
    Incidentally, I signed up for the Beta about 20 minutes after signups opened. Beating out both Hemos AND neal.

  • How odd, and here I've been playing D2 on the 1.05 patch for the last couple of months and haven't come across a single bug, nor anything that remotely resembles one, unless you count the blood golem/iron maiden combo a bug....

    Kintanon
  • Except that I wasn't looking for RPG or Hack and Slash, I was looking for something with a continuous gamestate that could be played on a 6-8 person LAN that would be enjoyed by all of my friends who have quite diverse taste in gameing. D2 has filled that need quite nicely and now we can all stay up until all hours of the night playing it.
    And just because something dosn't match your criteria doesn't make it a bad game. I dislike Starcraft quite a bit, but I still recognize that fact that it's a good game for people that like that sort of thing.

    Kintanon
  • WHY do game publishers hate europe?

    Because France is in Europe.

    Next question?
  • Haha! Great references. Mangar and Tyranthraxus really give me the warm fuzzies when I think about the great games of the past. The dog you reference, if I've got the right dog, is the best friendly NPC ever.
  • My friends and I played Diablo 2 for quite a while when it first came out. At least four hours a day, for about three or four months. We had a blast. Then something happened (can't remember what at this point), so we stopped playing for awhile. Then all of a sudden, we started playing again, at the same rate. Now we've stopped. I've no doubt that we'll start up again when the expansion comes out, if not sooner.

    Diablo 2 is the first game we've ever done that for. Thats really saying something about the quality of the game.

    --
    Donald Roeber
  • Hey, let us have our comptuer game betas. Japan has the console games, and you've got better cell phone service/coverage than we do. So deal with it :)

    --
    Donald Roeber
  • Thats what happens when a game is developed in the US of A, like most are.
  • I got D2 about 2 weeks ago.

    I have a boyfriend, and a career.

    I beat it last night.

    (Sorceress, 30th level, ice path, for those who case)

    Am I just a mad D2 machine? Did I fall into some bizarre time warp?

    Poor little no puppy toe!

  • Does "having the really good luck to have a staff that gave me +3 to my Lightening Bolt" and "Insane cold resistance out the wazoo due to armor AND a ring" count as a strategy?

    If so, that's what I did. ;)

    I died once or twice trying to kill him, got annoyed, ran around, leveled a few times, and managed to get some armor and a weapon that was good in whacking his sorry annoying ass.

    And IMO, he's the MOST annoying boss. I had an easier time with Diablo himself than Duriel, although that may have been due to the character I was playing.

    've got a barbarian now that's just awesome who's about to go take him on though.

    Poor little no puppy toe!

  • Other than the costs involved in shipping, which others have pointed out, there is also the time zone difference. Blizzard may want to do a server load test from 7 to 10 PM their time, which is perfectly reasonable for most people in the western hemisphere. However, that would be (depending on where you live) about 3 to 6 AM your time. Maybe you are willing to do that, but probably not. At least, you probably wouldn't be able to do it as often as they want you to.

    ------

  • Generally, it's the Democrats and Pyschopath liberals who limit our free-speech and decry violence in video games.

    Republicans (the decent ones) are the only people I lknow that don't have their head buried up their ass.

  • Yeah..
    There is still a large user base of DopeWars..

    somethings are never outdated.
  • Here is the problem I have with it. I beta tests Diablo 2 before its release. It spoils your enjoyment of the game. It's great and being able to play a game before anyone else, but when you play a game that is well (I think) for online play, and you are playing with suck a limited crowd in a beta, you will get burned out. As I did, when playing D2 beta, I played it so much, that when it came out, and I got a the final release of the game, I was already burned out. There was no enjoyment really left.

    So who's problem was this? Blizzard's for having a public beta test? Blizzard's for making a really fun game? Yours for signing up? Or yours for sitting at your computer for hours playing it?

    If you truly want what you say you do (to be able to play it after its official release and enjoy it), perhaps you should exercise some self restraint and wait until it comes out rather than being a beta tester just for bragging rights as you said in your last paragraph.
  • but didn't make a big enough issue out of it, so I'll reiterate: you don't download betas. You get them shipped to you. Therefore, location really does matter. It would be ludicrous for them to spend $20,000 plus customs charges shipping 1000 betas to Europe when it would cost them less than $3,500 to ship those all to domestic locations (costs $3.50 to ship from one coast to the other, most will cost less).

    If they couldn't get enough beta testers in the US, maybe you'd have a point, but since they always get too many applications anyway, it'd be silly to go through any extra expense for the sake of getting even MORE applications.

    Sorry had to do that... man Europeans who always think we're trying to fuck them for no apparent reason can piss me off :)

    The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.

  • They don't accept anyone not from their precious subcontinent for beta testing. I feel suitably offended

    f.
  • There's another good example (one of the regulars of the Lounge): Sirian's Diablo II Page [warpcore.org]
  • Wait for Diablo III :D
  • Funny.. I don't have to reboot to play it. Perhaps it is because I run Windows Me on my primary machine and the Linux box is (literally) shoved into the back of the closet.
  • What Hemos and CowboyNeal didn't think about -- by posting the beta test invitation on /. they've created potential beta-test-invitation competitors, thereby lessening their own chances of being selected for the beta test.
  • Why is Blizzard only accepting beta test applications from U.S. & Canadian residents?

    It's supposed to be a stress test. So they are going to try to get alot of beta testers in one particular market, across only a few timezones. That way (assuming everyone has a similar lifestyle) all the beta testers will hammer on the stress test servers in unison, giving them the stresses they are looking for.

  • If you're on Windows, there's also Utumno [mit.edu], an isometric roguelike based on Angband. Unfortunately, the project has been dead for exactly three years today (how's that for coincidence?); fortunately, the source appears to be available and it's looking for a new maintainer ...

  • The appeal of Diablo doesn't really lay in the graphics, not even really the storyline. It's all about building up your character and outfitting him or her with the best armors and weapons you can. That's why this game is so addicting; even after you finish the game the first time around you might only be, say, a level 25. Are you just going to stop playing after you worked so hard building up your character? Probably not.

    After you continue to play the game for a week or so, you find that you're not really "playing the game" as much as you're building up your character. Almost all of the Diablo players I know went through the game again at least in Nighmare mode. Obviously they didn't do it to go through the story again.

    The expansion pack would indeed have not been worth it if they weren't including two new different types of players to fool around with, but that's like telling a drug addict you've got two new exotics for him to try out ;)

  • For this reason, I like to call it "Pokemon".
  • I've seen people sell their beta test eligibility, and sometimes it can go for some big cash.
  • Diablo looks like it could be a fun game, but I cannot play it because the controls are just way too annoying. Oooh! Treasure, click it!. Watch out for that monster, click it! Click East to go East, Click on that guy to talk to him, Click Clickety Click Click Click.

  • That must be where their servers are. I could just see the engineers saying "Gee boss, the servers must be ready to go, we have 2,500 people connected from all the houses next door, and they're getting good ping times. Let's release."

    Fade to one week later. Diablo sells two million copies across the world.

    Fade to one week later, one hour later Why is our server crashing now? It was running so well during beta test?

    You Diablo players know what I'm talking about

  • How many Republicans who decry violence in video games will apply because it's a cool game.

    Same idea, different group. How many Democrats who applauded Lieberman will sign up?

    This is not flamebait, this is an honest question about the hypocracy in the US's political system.

    DanH
    Cav Pilot's Reference Page [cavalrypilot.com]
  • Lets look at counterstrike. It was extremely popular, because it required more than just 13373 FR4GG1NG SK1LLZ. It required thought and strategy. Then, just before version 1.0, they decided to make it more like a quake game and make it easier to frag and required less thought. What happened? It died... quickly
    Where the hell have you been living?
    Ah, i get it - just because you stopped playing you think everbody else did. BRRRRR. Wrong. - Thanks for playing.

    --
  • In-Game Saves
    ---
  • I submitted this story two days ago. It was rejected. I totally love how the left hand of Slashdot has no fucking clue what the right is doing.

    int break_spirit()
    {
    crush_nutz(left_nut,right_nut);
    return(1);
    };

  • gg (Score:1)

    by Tubster ( 149254 )
    "waking up sleeping dogs"
  • this affects the Linux crypto hackers open-sourcing the BSD Microsoft monopoly [penny-arcade.com] how?

    Oh well, i had to put SOMETHING in this article that was remotely Linux-based.

  • The Slashdot tag line(s) is this: "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." That tag encompasses more than just Linux. If all you want is Linux news, there are a multitude of sites for you. And while I admit Slashdot has and always will have decidedly pro-Linux leanings("Debian is Jesus," CmdrTaco once said), there is much more to Slashdot than Linux. Here's just a few of the topics that bring me here many, many times a day. Space news. Movies. Science. Ask Slashdot. And yes, even video game news, such as the Diablo II beta. That's news for nerds. And that is stuff that matters.
  • I personally think D2 kinda sucks... My favorite Massivley multiplayer game is evercrack! Rashmi Dsai 28th lvl Shaman Prexus
  • I really think that this will be a good addition to a great game, adding 2 char. classes and all, I just wish they'd add more than just an Act 5, however i did hear a rumor that you'll be able to play it at 800x600? i cant wait!! -fohat
  • Hack and slash vs. plot and strategy. And, yes, D2 has strategy, but nothing more than Q3. Sorry folks, but fragcounts and levels aren't the future, and are getting boring quickly.
  • Just cause it sold a bunch doesn't mean anything. Q3 sold a bunch, and in my opinion, is quite a boring game. More and more people want something besides just hack and slash... something with substance. I'm repeating myself now, so just look at my response from a reply to the same parent.
  • So you agree that the word "good" is an opinionated word?
    I gave my opinion, which, funny enough, doesn't agree with yours.

    But to put more into this post:
    I was putting the game up against many categories, and against many games. D2 is a hack-n-slash, without much strategy, no fancy graphics, and a decent online community. I could name at least a dozen games that do better in all categories. That is how I made my decision that this isn't a good game.
    I like all types and genres of games. But if you wanted an RPG, I'd suggest something fun like Balder's Gate, and if you wanted a hack'n'slash, I'd suggest UT (at least it has more than one mode of play when you get bored of hack'n'slash).
  • I feel that game developers are trying to focus more on graphics, sound, and other multimedia features, rather than the overall playability of the game

    Yes, several do. But there still exists developers that enjoy plot and gameplay more than graphics and sound. Like the almighty Warren Spector. Go play Deus Ex if you haven't yet. He's working on another game. Lets, also, not forget Richard Gariott, and Sid Meier who are both working on new games. Hopefully people will learn from these gurus...
  • CS is not dead. It has not died, it is not dieing. I have no idea where you got that bit of info. Maybe it's wishful thinking on your part. I still played after 1.0 (on hiatus now because of T2) and it was still the same basic game and still very fun.

    There was a major drop of players after the 1.0 release. That, to me, means its dying. And there will always be fanatics that will stay, but most of the players left.

    About Tribes... funny that very few of the people online actually use teamwork. No, T1 did well because it was nicely positioned and an excellent break from the standard FPS games. T2 is selling out because it is a sequel.

    But if you jump into a game that uses teamplay, which I find everyday, you'll either be losing poorly, or winning easily (depending on which side you start on).
    The reason its hard to find, though, is because people get frustrated because they know that teamplay is the easiest way to fight teamplay (fire with fire), and getting people to work together while they are loosing is tough. I do agree with T2 selling out because its a sequel, but it is a sequel to a very popular game, and it was good as the hype behind it.

    Actually the gameplay of Diablo is one of the best things about it. Their interface is decent and intuitive. It's much less dull than many games because you often have to judge when to use this power or that power, and often do so creatively. Two characters of the same class could have completely different styles.

    See, now when I think of a good interface, I think of Sacrifice. It was very fast to learn and simple to use even though its based on a very complex system. A bad one would be B&W (since you are familiar with it), which is a touch ackward (but I am still enjoying the game).
    True, the style of play is different from character to character, but the goal is the same (hack'n'slash). Go play Deus Ex, where you can have the same "class" but different skills, and every obsticale you find can be overcome a variety of ways, including the skillset you prefer.

  • Re:Would have been great in 1998 (Score:5)

    by FortKnox ( 169099 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @04:58AM (#311411) Homepage Journal
    I'm just going to post to the parent to support it.
    I agree with the idea behind what you are saying. But graphics aren't what makes this game dull. Heck, I still play systemshock2 religiously (if you haven't played it yet, go grab youself a copy! Its only like $9.99, and it is more than worth it!). The reason the game is dull is because its just go around and kill stuff. Yeah... collect armor and gain levels... but is this really that interesting? Where's the strategy? There is very little.
    Lets look at counterstrike. It was extremely popular, because it required more than just 13373 FR4GG1NG SK1LLZ. It required thought and strategy. Then, just before version 1.0, they decided to make it more like a quake game and make it easier to frag and required less thought. What happened? It died... quickly.
    Lets look at Tribes (and the new Tribes2). Sold out instantly. Why? Because this game *requires* teamwork and strategy. Time and time again, I could round up a band of 6 guys that weren't good at fragging, but knew how to work together, and annilate a team of 8 deulers (excellent one-on-one'ers) that wouldn't work together.
    D2, also, makes the person that takes too much time (plays all day for about 6 months), and makes him a god that can't be beat. This is a cheap way to keep players. It makes you want to play more and more so that you are unbeatable. Then when a newbie comes along they are crushed.
    I think games should reward the person with the best strategy. That way you learn strategies the more you play, and they better you will be.
    Would you rather play a game where you have to spend months of 24-7 playing to be the best, or days of thinking to be better, and always have a challenge? If you answered the former, then you'll be in for a great wakeup when you have to work all day.

  • Re:Would have been great in 1998 (Score:3)

    by Psmylie ( 169236 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @04:31AM (#311412) Homepage
    I really yearn for the days (pre-girlfriend and pre-career) when I could take the time to actually beat a game, let alone multiple times. Heck, when I was a teen, I would fall asleep playing, wake up, and play some more.

    Seems kinda pathetic when I think about it, but DAMN I miss that!

  • Re:I wonder (Score:3)

    by Psmylie ( 169236 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @04:37AM (#311413) Homepage
    Hee... I just got this image of Strom Thurmand staring at a computer screen, shouting "Yes! I just got Corpse Explosion!"
  • When Diablo originally came out I spent many an hour hacking and slashing away. It was frustrating at times having to run all over that stupid little town but the overall fun factor was there.

    With the introduction of Diablo II, the hack and slash fun I remember in the original was back but it seemed that it was just more of the same. Granted, longer and with more characters and game play options but still I felt as if I could have reinstalled Diablo and gotten the same feeling.

    The main and most glaring reason for this was Blizzards decision to leave the screen size at 640x480. While they did introduce some new graphical options with their 3d support, Blizzard has always been about eye candy and quality game play. While they at least hit for par in the game play area they sliced hard and lost their balls in the rough when it came to the eye candy.

    To rant some more, I'm not sure what demographics they were studying when they picked out 640x480 as being the ONLY resolution for one of their hallmark games. The web has been standard at 800x600 (if not already at 1024x768) for a few years now. Some users might still run 640x480, but I doubt that if that was the case that they could even meet the min system requirements for DII let alone run it at enjoyably.

    Bottom line, I played DII a bit, but after a while I just felt like I was back in the late 90's and better games were calling. Unless Blizzard fixes that my opinion will remain the same.


    p.s. And for you hardcore linux geeks. Get over the fact that some ppl run Winbloz to play games.
  • Actually, they should just give up and start playing Baldur's Gate.
  • I don't know about anyone else, but in reading the reviews for Diablo II the series definitely lost its spark. Antiquated graphics, an inept client/server system and more of the same "hack and slash" gameplay caused most reviewers to say "Huh? This is what we were waiting for?"

    I say go play Baldur's Gate II for a real RPG experience. The Sims, Unreal Tournament and No One Lives Forever are some other great Windows games.

  • I have to agree with illserve, you were incorrect on the points he made. Except the comment about Tribes, that is too much of a blanket statement. Just because a game lost players, even a signifigant portion of the playerbase, does not mean it is dying. Games can exist entirely on the fanatics that you describe. An example of this was the original NWN on AOL which had a base that was many times its max capacity, and was constantly full (even at times like 3am) up until the day it was shut down. After it was shut down alot of the people who had previously been paying $2/hour to play it tried to get it started back up on another service. Failing that they are now trying to create something that was very similar to the original. These people made up the entire base of the game for several years, slowly growing into what would probably be termed fanatics because of the fervor that they clung to the desire for the game. But NWN existed entirely on these people for the longest time.

    Diablo is a very simple game. Repetivie, simple interface, few choices, and it focuses on keeping the player occupied by physical goals such as levels, stats, items and exp. Typical of MUDs and today's MMORPGS. But that doesn't mean its a bad game or one that shouldn't have been made.

    I see alot of gamers who want to become game designers or work in the game industry. But the big hurdle that alot of them need to get over is the idea of true games. They need to realize that a game is good if enough people want to play it to make back the cost of its production. It doesn't matter if it follows the rules of all the other games, or if its not original enough.

    The weirdest thing about games is that everyone wants to tailor the game to themselves. But the biggest thing about gameplay is the challenge of adaptability. If people want all the good games to be ready-set for their style of play then there would not be any creativity or expansive learning involved in playing those games. Adapting to a new style of play caused by changes in games or new games is one of the things that evolves decent gamers into great gamers.

    :)
  • I just retired a couple of characters on MUME recently...one had 27 days of play time, and the other around 20. Those were two, and at one time I had seven. I know that Everquest is addictive, which is why I will never play it. But for sheer mind-sucking addiction, free of charge, MUDs are still ranked pretty high in my book. I probably spent six months doing nothing but playing one game, over the course of four years.
  • Completely off topic....

    I got three letters that should make you feel better about living outside of the US....G S M.

  • Everytime we see a post from Taco that contains a link to a QuickTime video we hear him whining "Of course, it doesn't work in Linux so I can't see it."

    I can think of a number of reasons why the two situations are slightly different:

    Reboot Time Overhead
    In a dual-boot situation, it's not hard to see the difference between rebooting for several hours of game play versus rebooting just to view a 5 minute video clip. In the later case, the hassle of rebooting is a disproportionately large portion of the entire task.

    Gaming Precludes Multitasking
    Most games tend to suck most-to-all of your attention. While you may have peaks and lulls in the Diablo excitement level, you generally have to actively control your character for even the mundane task of travelling through completely purged levels (assuming they haven't added an autowalk feature to Diablo II). With a video clip, on the other hand, (especially if it's a talk, lecture, or a similar thing where the visual contents consist of long periods of pictures of J. Random Person just moving his/her mouth and occasionally gesturing), it's generally possible to get other tasks done. Depending on what those other tasks are, you may feel less than fully productive when working from a Windows box (especially if you don't use Windows often enough to justify going through the trouble of installing all the Unix-like utilities and tools for Windows that you can get your hands on).

    Games -> Code, Video -> Information
    I understand the technological and economic reasons that prevent Linux versions of most games -- the games are generally non-free (in both beer and speech), porting takes work, work generally takes money (due to the non-free factor), and that money generally needs to be recouped by selling copies of the port. While, ideally, I wouldn't complain if a game company were to start releasing all the games for free (either one), I would have to question their business sense. (Apologies for any inaccuracies in the following; I'm not well-versed in most of the video details.) With video, on the other hand, the people providing it are generally doing so in a "come one, come all, see our video clip" information provider manner. There are ways they can avoid making their information unviewable to a certain minority of computer users. However, due to ignorance, laziness, or any of a number of other possible factors, they've failed in part of their "information provider" role.

  • Now, I'm going to put in my plug about how, oh how, I wish we could get DII ported ;)
  • ahh yes. Lord British's non-compete agreement JUST expired. Good shit should becomming from him soon (he has had a year to work on it)

    Sanchi
  • Welcome to Blizzard. They dont put out crap for games, they canned Warcraft Adventures. Warcraft 1 and 2, Diablo 1 and 2 Starcraft, and 4 expansions. 9 products and they have been in buiness for 9 years now. That should say something for quality.

    Sanchi
  • you can subscribe from 4 april to 11 april BUT only if you live in america or taiwan. That latest part make me wonder. How in the world can somebody in taiwan join be silly me in europe has no change at all....Why is Blizzard only accepting beta test applications from U.S. & Canadian residents? faq says: "Due to the differences in varying country time zones, we have decided to limit the test to U.S., Canada, and a small number of pre-selected cyber game cafés. " [battle.net] And since the CD will be mailed i can not work arround it. bummer. But maybe the cd will leak.....
  • June or July was the projected release date and all word from blizzard to date indicates that they are running on schedule if not slightly ahead.
  • I just filled out my form - have you? And I'd just like to reiterate my willingness to beta-test. Blizzard. I'm willing. So's CowboyNeal.

    Uh-huh. Of course, Slashdot editors will continue to conclude any story involving a QuickTime file with a smug, "I just wish they would release it in a format I could actually view."

    And you guys wonder why developers aren't falling over each other to release quality Linux games?

    Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.

  • I do not believe that companies are out to screw over their customers on the other side of the pond.

    Keep in mind that a majority of game developers are based in the US. Since Blizzard only wants to do a limited test of the expansion, it makes sense that they limit it to the continent they are based on. International shipping costs are an unnecesary expense for a beta test.

    As for getting games weeks behind the US... that's also because a majority of game companies, publishers, and distributors are based in the US. When they decide to ship, they want there game out there ASAP, and the US is the easiest maket to hit first.

    I understand your frustration at having to wait for everything and not being eligable for most betas, but look at it as a logistical situation... it doesn't make sense for companies to do an international beta test. Lionhead did an extensive amount of beta testing for B&W (though sometimes I wonder about that...) in England, their home country... Why wasn't there a beta test in the US? Because it would be stupid to spend all that money on shipping when they have a cheaper solution.

    It's not always about us Americans getting all the breaks.

    -Z

  • It is actually inferior to the original in many, many ways. Blizzard worked on it for over 3 years and just couldn't get the job done.

    The following is a repost from the Diablo Strategy & Tactics forum on battle.net, where I originally posted it to try to explain why I uninstalled D2 two weeks after I wasted my $40 on it.

    (repost begins)

    ...The thing is, D1 was amazing for its time,
    whereas D2 is very mediocre for modern times. D1's graphics were
    top notch when it came out, and still have a nice feel of gritty
    realism D2 lacks. D2's are just: "Oh... Er... Blizzard
    obviously felt no need to bring the graphics into the new
    millennium. Ok..."

    Gameplay? Mostly the same. I suppose this is ok, except for the
    insane "no level load" mistake, which hideously punishes
    anyone who doesn't have 256 megs of RAM, a T1 connection, and a
    hefty dose of blind luck. (Can you say, "Lagcore"? Can
    you say, "Waypoint PK'd"? I knew you could!)

    Sound? Improved very slightly, I'll admit, though my system,
    alas, is sucking too bad to handle it now.

    The whole skills thing is cool, and would be amazing if it
    weren't so buggy and RIDDLED with apocryphal, inaccurate, and
    missing information. Also, the ratio of usable to useless skills
    has decreased a LOT since D1. In D1 the only spells I never use
    are Inferno, Blood Star, and Bone Spirit; in D2 I can think of 4
    or more skills in EVERY class I never use. If there is ever a
    JG2, it will be about 100% more different from the D2 manual
    than JG was from the D1 manual. Seriously. The only other
    drawback is that one must rise to a very high level before the
    game actually becomes FUN, in my experience - in that at level
    20, if you're playing for power, you probably only have 2 or 3
    skills to play with. Yay, now that's excitement.

    Playerkilling... don't even get me started. Once again, Blizzard caters to 15 year old punks with bad attitudes by keeping playerkilling in the game. And then they do 10 million "balance" changes, as if pkilling in a fight where whoever sees the other guy first wins, makes any sense. At least they got rid of "ears". =/

    The plot is semi-ok, except for the fact that the entire thing
    was kept secret for about 3 picoseconds. Hurrah. The trouble
    with the multiple towns is that I was unable to ever CARE about
    any of them or their people, just as soon as I started to get a
    handle on the various townies' characters I was off again, always
    to the east...

    Plus the tacked-on fourth act and the callous treatment of
    Tristram's destruction really left me cold. I think Tristram's
    destruction deserved an FMV more than Diablo's meeting with
    Marius. I *really* would have enjoyed watching Wirt die.
    >:) Of course, the absolute WORST, unforgiveable, thing
    about D2's plot is that it trivializes your victory in D1. So
    what if you beat Diablo? Your precious character failed in the
    end, and so did Tal Rasha, and oh by the way we lied to you about
    what the Soulstones are for. So there, nyaah. Gee, thanks
    Blizz...

    Oh, and the items... lots of good (though highly confusing to
    the D1 mind) ideas here. The set items are, I think, one of the
    only truly great improvements over D1, but the game does not
    allow enough inv/stash space to store set pieces until you find
    the rest, so instead you get people using set items like they
    would any other rare. Oh well. It might have been nice to have
    an extra stash with the general store owner in any town, like
    having items "in hock" that you'd have to pay a little
    fee to retrieve, but have like 20x20 more storage. Or something.

    Add to this the buggy items, the weird items, the dupable (sigh!)
    items, and the completely missing items... And the fact that it takes over 200 times the disk space of Diablo 1, for about 2/3 the fun value.

    D1 had its
    problems, I'll admit. Its buglist is also ridiculously long for
    a game that's been patched so many times. But cmon, gimme a
    break. I played D2 until I beat it in Open. A week later, it
    was off my HD. Diablo 1 has never left. D2 is simply not worthy
    as a successor, and if I tried to point to a reason for its
    failure, it would be this:

    Blizzard tried to do too much, and didn't have enough time or
    resources left over to polish and debug. So some areas of it
    shine, and the rest suck abominably. Oh, it's a playable game,
    but there's no way it's on the level of Diablo. If they had been
    a bit less ambitious (ie., if they had managed to put a sock in
    their marketing guys before they could promise too much), it
    would have been a FAR better game.

    ... and oh yeah. Serverside SUCKS. I'm amazed they thought it
    would work.

    (repost ends)

    I've been playing D1 for years, and D2 just isn't worthy. The reasons it's more popular than D1 are:

    1.) you can run - SERIOUSLY!! I know people who prefer D2 for no more reason than this! However, they fail to remember that there were much smaller distances in D1, and thus no reason to NEED running. Plus, D1 success requires tactical thinking, running (or teleporting) around like a chicken with your head cut off is an excellent way to get mobbed and killed. D2 is completely lacking in tactical or strategic thinking. "Put on magic items. Go click on monsters. WHEEEEEEE!" As a Diablo old timer, Pete, puts it, when there's no challenge then all the game is, is an hours-long mouse test. Have fun left clicking.

    2.) It's shiiiiiiiny. Typical "newer must be better" attitude, plus a lot of folks have never tried D1. However, though the graphics may be better, they're not 3 freakin' years better. And the "atmosphere" has been lost... where D1 was gothic and creepy, D2 is cartoonish and dull.

    3.) The Diablo patches. Blizzard has deliberately released a "patch" v 1.08, as well as several server patches, in a more or less successful attempt to kill Diablo 1. Before v 1.08 and the server patches, despite the presence of D2, there were usually between 5 and 8 thousand D1 clients online. Now it's a heavy day for D1 when there are 1000 clients on.

    I'm sorry to be a wet blanket, but it's just been too many years since I've seen anyone at Buzzard do anything to deserve the great reputation they got off Diablo and WC2.

    -Kasreyn

  • Re:Would have been great in 1998 (Score:3)

    by UltraBot2K1 ( 320256 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @04:24AM (#311454) Homepage Journal
    The problem remains, though, that D2 is simply behind the times. I played D2 and was, well, bored. The game's graphics and interface is dated, and even the storyline is kind of dull.

    Would you care to explain to me how old game=boring game?

    Just because a game doesn't have a flashy shiny interface that requires a Geforce2 to run, doesn't make it any less enjoyable. Have you ever played Tetris? It is so simplistic, it can be coded to run on a Texas Instruments calculator, and yet it is one of the most popular games in history. People have been playing chess for hundereds of years without any major improvements to the game. Does that make chess "boring"?

    Just because a game doesn't use millions of polygons and fancy lighting and texture effects, doesn't make it a bad game. Period.

  • Re:Whoo hoo! (Score:5)

    by UltraBot2K1 ( 320256 ) on Friday April 06, 2001 @04:16AM (#311455) Homepage Journal
    Yeah, what kind of a two-bit company would only release a software title for one OS? I don't know who the hell Blizzard thinks they are, but it's high time they stop alienating the dozens of customers who use Linux. Imagine all the money they're losing by only releasing a product that works with 95% of the world's computers. Those silly software designers!

Slashdot Top Deals

They laughed at Einstein. They laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- Carl Sagan

Close