Video The State of the Diablo 3 Beta (Two Videos) 237
Video no longer available.
It's been almost four years since Diablo 3 was announced, and its development began years earlier. Its predecessors helped define the action RPG genre, so anticipation is high among fans of the franchise. The game has undergone closed beta testing since September, and a lot has changed since then. Now that Blizzard has settled on May 15th as a release date, we thought this would be a good time to take a look at the state of the game as it currently exists. These two videos show actual gameplay of the various classes, explain the skill and rune systems, take a look at the auction house, and go over many of the other changes since the beginning of development. (Click to play the first video, and the second one will play automagically after the first one ends.)
The real state of Diablo III (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:4, Insightful)
This is basically my thought on it as well. Loved Diablo and Diablo II, but my wireless is a little flaky because of my apartment's layout so the only multiplayer that works well is on the LAN. I'd be ok with an online activation. I'd tolerate it checking in once a week or once a month. But I don't want to have to spend a half hour fudging around with the wireless signal every time I want to play an offline game.
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what Torchlight II is for.
Re: (Score:2)
This is what Torchlight II is for.
That's my answer too. Ever since Activision, every move Blizzard makes gets seedier and seedier. I've played every Blizzard game since Blackthorne, but I'm done. If I wanted to pay to win, I'd...
I don't ever want to pay to win.
Re: (Score:3)
If only it would come out already! I'm running out of feet to gnaw off.
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:4, Insightful)
Not even that, what happens in 5-10 years when you want to dig up the game and play it again? Will the servers still be online? Will there be a "required" patch which doesn't work well with your system or nerfs your favorite character?
Blizzard is actually the one company that I feel I can trust to keep the servers running for a lon gperiod of time, becuase they tend to stick with and support their games. They seem to have a corporate mindset that looks and plans in the long term, as opposed to most other publishers that just look to the next game and leave just a token force to maintain a previous game. That being said, I really enjoyed Diablo II, but after being disappointed with SC2, I do not expect to buy D3 any time soon.
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe being online isn't a problem. But, having multiple computers online, all connecting to battlenet while they really just need to talk to each other might be. Bandwidth may be a bottleneck.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that rather than plan to keep the servers up forever, I could see them release a patch that would allow LAN play if it were true that they had to close down for some reason" or, failing that, to at least patch it to remove the must be online part.
Blizzard has by and large done alright by me - I don't like the drm they are using now but they are the one studio that releases and supports their games well enough for me to put up with it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that rather than plan to keep the servers up forever, I could see them release a patch that would allow LAN play if it were true that they had to close down for some reason" or, failing that, to at least patch it to remove the must be online part.
What if they go bankrupt? Blizzard are a strong company now, but 10 years is a long time and plenty of great companies have fallen before. Then they wouldn't have the resources to throw at that sort of thing- you'd be stuck with things in the state they are when the bailiffs move in.
What if they're purchased by someone less trustworthy. What if Oracle decided to move into video gaming and bought them out- do you trust Oracle to do right by you? Or some faceless private equity firm?
Better to not put the stup
Re: (Score:2)
My only complaint with Blizzard's implementation of Diablo 2 is that each patch (especially after 1.07 or so) drastically changed gameplay. Suddenly great sets were crap, great characters were crap, etc. Sure, it adds a level of replayability, but if I have a lvl 60 on its way to greatness, I don't want to trash it and start over on the Blood Moore with a new character.
Re: (Score:3)
Remember this?
"I am Akara, High Priestess of the Sisterhood of the Sightless Eye. I welcome you, traveler, to our camp, but I'm afraid I can offer you but poor shelter within these rickety walls."
She'll reset your stats once per difficulty level now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Blizzard is actually the one company that I feel I can trust to keep the servers running for a lon gperiod of time, becuase they tend to stick with and support their games. They seem to have a corporate mindset that looks and plans in the long term, as opposed to most other publishers that just look to the next game and leave just a token force to maintain a previous game. That being said, I really enjoyed Diablo II, but after being disappointed with SC2, I do not expect to buy D3 any time soon.
I agree with this, but the problem now is that it isn't just Blizzard. Activision is in the picture and my trust in them is much lower. I somewhat want to play Diablo 3 but I doubt I will because of this.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you tried playing Diablo 2 lately? The only thing you can do on it today is spam the 'n' key to clear the neverending spam. If you play in a game of 8 people, you'll be lucky to have just 1 of them be an actual person, the rest are bots hosting the run, leeching the xp, or spamming the chat log with websites.
If Blizzard were truly committed to their games, they would still be addressing live multiplayer issues. Keeping resources available for a game from not last decade, but the one prior, is not a maj
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Because the wireless bridges the wired LAN to where the cable comes into the house, which is where the wireless AP is located. So the LAN is wired, except for the link back to the router. It's almost identical to the setup I had to use in college when they yanked all of the wired ports in favor of campus-wide 802.11n coverage about 5 years ago - great when you have a number of machines that don't have wireless cards and don't need a huge amount of bandwidth.
And for those of us who like games, but are still
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with OP.
My roomates have decided to buy D3, I am going to be the outsider on this one.
I bought SWTOR and was heavily disappointed, I'm not buying any more games that 'might' be what I want.
The DRM really seals the deal for me, if it weren't for that I'd probably buy it just to toss on my laptop to play once in a while, but with the DRM, it's just craptastic garbage.
Re: (Score:3)
Sigh. It's not DRM. It's a dumb client, that doesn't have the code required to drive it all.
The "DRM" aspect is just a side effect. At least call it for what it is.
Re: (Score:2)
It's naive to think making the client dumb wasn't primarily driven by DRM concerns.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it much more likely it was done to cut costs and development time.
Which is faster to work with, you think?
1. Dumb client, server who does all the AI and logic. They also get to use all the goodies they learned with WoW, and probably a good portion of the same infrastructure.
2. Smart client, who can do what server does, and a server that does it all as well for MP.
#2 means lots of duplication, which increases maintenance cost/effort etc. #1 is elegant, with the drawback that the client is useless wit
Re: (Score:2)
I should add that NOT giving us the server in that first model actually makes sense here too, in that it impedes third-party gateways from springing up. I may not agree with the choice, but I do see it's merit.
Re: (Score:2)
You can consider it "Activision-Blizzard" actually. The "Activision" part is important as it explains what happened to the Blizzard we knew and loved. Think "monetized" and "nickel and dimed".
It's not just the DRM that requires online stuff, it's so they can ding you as much as possible - if you didn't go online, there
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it works that way. They even added a way to reset your skill points in D2 in a (very) late patch, though only once per difficulty. Still, I think you won't have to hack your character just to try a different build.
Re: (Score:2)
It's more than just skills, though... Resetting skill points will not change my barbarian to a rogue, reopen a particular quest dungeon, or let me play an act backwards.
Re: (Score:2)
I do recall some areas being empty of monsters after the first run, but I may be mistaken. It's been too long.
If I'm already hacking the character, the reward is pointless, but yes, playing the boss battle again was fun, and that couldn't always be done. Yes, it's mucking with the game flow, but it's a game. If I want to make it more entertaining without affecting anyone else, why stop me? If I want to make a character with a single health point and an undead horde take on the final boss, what exactly is th
Re: (Score:2)
I do recall some areas being empty of monsters after the first run, but I may be mistaken. It's been too long.
If I'm already hacking the character, the reward is pointless, but yes, playing the boss battle again was fun, and that couldn't always be done.
Yeah, it hasn't been that long for me (decided I finally wanted to beat the game through Hell mode to prep for D3 ) and you're mistaken. All the monsters, including all bosses, are waiting for you again when you quit and restart. There's no reason to edit a character just to re-do content. Re-doing content is pretty much what the whole game is based on. :P
If I want to make a character with a single health point and an undead horde take on the final boss, what exactly is the problem?
Absolutely no problem! I don't care at all if you want to hack your single player game all to hell. I also don't care if you can't. Not every sing
Re: (Score:2)
Not being able to do anything you want like skipping to the end boss with an unworkable build or giving yourself a zillion skill points is not an issue that needs to be fixed.
I didn't ever say it should be fixed, but it does diminish the fun of the game for me, so I simply won't buy it. Less game for me, less money for Blizzard... Too bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Whereas I will gladly exchange the ability to hack my character for a talent-reset ability and getting rid of having to choose whether I'm playing single or multi-player at character creation time.
*shrug*
Re: (Score:2)
who cares about game flow in a game like diablo 2 the mother of "let's play it from the beginning again with a boosted character!" ??
Re: (Score:2)
who cares about game flow in a game like diablo 2 the mother of "let's play it from the beginning again with a boosted character!" ??
I don't, but I also don't care if you can't break the game flow just because. "Cheating" in a single player game doesn't matter to me. Not being able to cheat in a single player game also doesn't matter to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The DRM might piss some people off but isn't the server-client integrity quite important when dealing with real money transactions within the game such as the real money auction house?
It would. And it is a problem easily ('easily' in theory, though not perhaps in execution) solved: I can create characters 'online,' which are stored on Blizzard servers, only playable when connected to the internet for communication with said servers, and can vend their inventories on an RMT market. I can also create characters 'offline,' which can be played anytime, connected or not, and whose inventories can't interact with an RMT market. This is a solution which would give Blizzard the ability to kee
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:5, Informative)
Not necessarily RELIABLE internet access.
I live in the US, just outside a town of 200,000 people. I'm half a mile from a school.
In order for me to get RELIABLE internet that's faster than dialup would cost me $2,419.60.
Per month.
I use cellular internet. It's not terribly expensive, and it works well enough, and it's fast enough. But it does lag out and drop out a lot, and if I lost my game progress every time it did, I'd get mightily pissed.
I get mad enough as is when Steam decides that since it can sort of see the internet, but not connect to the Steam server, then it won't even start up enough for me to put it in offline mode, so I can't play Steam games nyah nyah.
And that's just a check at the client start, not a constant connection,
Re:The real state of Diablo III (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Not true - when Battle.net is down you can still play, you just don't get any awards / medals / unlockable things.
You would think that because SC2 is like that... but unless you provide a good citation, my opinion is that D3 is like WOW, where the game logic *IS* in the server [as it seems on the reverse engineering that has been happening on the game communication with battlenet servers]. So if you are not connected, it is impossible to play (or crack) the game. Of course, until a cracked server leaks like it happened in WOW.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in your crowd.
It's not even DRM - it's more that they decided to save time and effort and use as much of the multiplayer code as they could for single player. As a side effect, single player is just a client into a one-player game.
I don't exactly think it's the BEST idea ever, but I do see how it saved a shitton of developer effort - only one place to modify, and it takes your "server code" completely out of the clients hands and leaves it in the servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Not gonna happen without a server breach. The server code is completely disconnected (that's why SP requires a net connection - not because it authenticates you, but because the client is dumb)
Diablo two and a half: (Score:5, Interesting)
So I've been playing an isometric arpg called Path of Exile for the last week+. It's still in beta, and the story is fleshing out, but the gameplay itself is really polished, and it has lots of interesting features I won't list, but to name a few:
Diablo 2 is it's role-model.
Skills/spells go into gem sockets similar to FF7's materia.
Passive skills are assigned to a board, similar to FF10.
There is no gold, rather players trade "orbs", which vary in what they do, from turn a normal item into a rare, or change the numerical properties on a magical item, etc., etc. This is also the "crafting" for the game.
Anyways, I'm not affiliated with the company (A 16-man team out of New Zeeland), but am hoping to spread some word of mouth so others can find and play it. Look me up if you have any questions, Harvester is my IGN.
Re:Diablo two and a half: (Score:5, Interesting)
So I've been playing an isometric arpg called Path of Exile for the last week+. It's still in beta, and the story is fleshing out, but the gameplay itself is really polished, and it has lots of interesting features I won't list, but to name a few:
Diablo 2 is it's role-model.
Skills/spells go into gem sockets similar to FF7's materia.
Passive skills are assigned to a board, similar to FF10.
There is no gold, rather players trade "orbs", which vary in what they do, from turn a normal item into a rare, or change the numerical properties on a magical item, etc., etc. This is also the "crafting" for the game.
Anyways, I'm not affiliated with the company (A 16-man team out of New Zeeland), but am hoping to spread some word of mouth so others can find and play it. Look me up if you have any questions, Harvester is my IGN.
I played it on the stress test last weekend. I hadn't heard of it before last week and came into it without preconceived notions. I think it might better be labeled Diablo 3.5 than 2.5 - it seems to take the good from 2, discard the bad, and introduce new ideas to a much greater degree than D3. Also, it's supposedly going to be F2P despite the level of polish that looks equivalent to D3's beta.
Meh. (Score:5, Interesting)
Diablo 2 was great... good enough graphics for its time, with a challenging skill system and, most importantly to me, a fantastic story. Then it ended on a cliffhanger, with one of the Prime Evils still loose. Then the expansion ended on somewhat less of a cliffhanger: "I'm going to destroy this thing, and I have no idea what's going to happen to the world."
I want to play the next installment, I really do... but I probably won't. I've been hearing about it for two years, and the excitement's gone. Sure, it was neat to read about the new classes and see the new baddies. It was fun to go back and play the first two again to remember the story. Now all I hear about is DRM and auctions.
If I wanted artificial restrictions, I'd go lock myself in a dark room for a few hours. If I wanted an auction, I'd go browse eBay. I don't want those, though. I want a visual interactive story, so I'm going to play a video game. Perhaps someday I'll be able to buy D3 off of GOG to find out the end of the story, or perhaps even get a pirated version (ignoring my usual attitude toward those lazy mooching pirates). Maybe I'll break down and buy the retail version, if I get excited again.
My attitude right now is an utterly non-committal "meh." Sorry, Blizzard, but you've lost my attention, and I doubt you'll get it back again.
Re:Meh. (Score:5, Informative)
Now all I hear about is DRM and auctions.
If I wanted artificial restrictions, I'd go lock myself in a dark room for a few hours. If I wanted an auction, I'd go browse eBay. I don't want those, though. I want a visual interactive story, so I'm going to play a video game.
Having been in the beta since November or so, all I can tell you is that you're visiting the wrong websites. I've bought 0 items at an auction house, and sold just as many. Maybe this means I won't end up with the top 10% of gear, but that's fine by me.
The story is there, the gameplay is there. Tristram is once again in trouble. Decard Cain is still old. The button mash fast "sweet got a rare" fun is still present.
If you're convinced you won't buy it, or have a moral obligation not to due to the DRM, fine. I found it to be a nice continuation of the series and will be plopping down my $.
Re: (Score:2)
I played D1 as a child, and would probably enjoy D3 at that age. But I played D2 as a competitive older teen, and still come back to it.
Playing with the top 10% of gear is important to me in a game where the only success is defined in your gear. You killed Diablo? Neat, I guess. Bale? Ok, whatever. You have a perfect crown of ages? CAN I SEE IT?!
How much time have you spent oogling or being oogled on D2? Maybe I'm not in the majority, but I think I am.
The value in this system is the lack of constant new ite
Re:Meh. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
With a steady income and a shiny new computer, I've grown into playing games. Heck, I bought Portal 2 within the first hour it was available (which was conveniently 7 hours before I left on a long car trip, where I was conveniently a passenger). I'm just not excited about this one, and don't see Blizzard doing anything to make me excited.
Auction House (Score:3)
I hope they don't repeat the same stupid useless feature of World of Warcraft's auction house: stacks.
Why stacks are completely pointless:
- People list dozens if not hundreds of 1-item listings in order to bury others who sell by stacks.
- Sorting by price means you're sorting by stack price, which is pointless. Sorting by price should be based on the price per unit.
- Selling items should never "stack". You have 56 items for sale, that's all there is to it.
- If I want to only buy 8 units and you've got the lowest price per unit, then I buy 8 of those 56 units that you have for sale.
- If people are selling at the same price as you, then items listed earlier have precedence.
Whoever thought using stacks in the auction house was a good idea never actually used it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Use auctionator and those issues go away. It's free and trivial to install and use.
While WoW has integrated many addons into their core UI, they also added the ability to use addons for things where users want to customize their UI even more, so there's really no reason to settle for the stock UI if some element of it doesn't work for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Blizzard added the ability to incorporate addons for people who want to customize UI elements that they want to swap. Addons are free and easily available from a number of places, and can be developed by anyone.
So no, that is the exact opposite of broken to me. It allows me greater choice to modify things to make them how I want them rather than how some designer decrees I must use them.
An extensible and modifiable design that allows everyone to make things just right for their own use is infinitely superio
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what? Just enter "56" for the quantity you want to buy. I never said that buying should be limited to one unit at a time, that would be insane.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You should be able to just say you want up to x number of something up to y currency units each and get up to x of them from the lowest bidding, earliest sellers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your complaint is more a problem of how you recieve your purchased good than how the market system actually functions.
I just started playing Eve last weekend and so far I really like how the market there is set up. You can sort any which way you want. You can post buy and sell orders. When you buy something it's automatically placed in your storage, at whichever station it was posted from. The fact that the markets are all locality based allows for some real commerce though it isn't necessary in a game like
Re: (Score:2)
Real life is limited by manufacturing costs, shipping and other factors. WoW is only a game.
Re: (Score:2)
The real question here is (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So you're cheap?
Digital media is like love, in that you can give it away without ever running out of it.
So I guess, you are cheap if you don't pay for love
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Digital media is like love, in that you can give it away without ever running out of it.
Digital Media is also like love in that you can't eat it (insert 'witty' innuendo here). Media makers like to eat and giving it away free isn't conducive to the goal of feeding oneself.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Media makers like to eat and giving it away free isn't conducive to the goal of feeding oneself.
Really? Jonathan Coulton and loads of other people seem to give their media away (to the general public) and live just perfectly fine.
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
You know these companies that make software, they have staff, they are not going to work for free because they need to pay for food, shelter, travel, fuel, health care, entertainment, education and save some up for an emergency, For themselves and often for other dependents as well. These people are good at "sequencing bits" in new original ways, when executed on a computer that will give entertainment to others. You are not paying for the bits you are paying for the work to make it. Well if you think about it you are probably more likely paying for them to work on their next project.
Standard GNU methods of making profit doesn't work too well with games.
1. You are not going to charge for consulting. If the game needs a consultant they wont play it.
2. If you are not going to charge for support. They just won't pay for it.
3. You could sell add ons. However you need to be careful as those add ons may break the GNU.
4. You package the game on a piece of hardware. Which may work... However after they get the source there will be a PC version soon and they will no longer need your hardware.
Sorry but the GNU model doesn't lead itself for a market of developers. if all software was GNU then Programming will be strictly a part-time/hobby thing and quality will go down the toilet because in order to make money they will need other full time jobs with a different discipline and less people willing to study computer science.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Informative)
First off, not all linux applications need to follow the GNU. You can distribute a linux application with any license you please -- it may hinder repository access with particular distributions, but there's nothing stopping you from creating your own application manager, putting THAT in the repository, and then using that to distribute your games. Just saying.
Second, freemium is how it's all going to be in a decade full stop. You might as well get on that wagon now. And GNOME and KDE are almost to the point where Grandma can be trained to use it just as easily as Windows, which is the benchmark I tend to use when I consider the emerging market for a particular operating system. So, I expect that in another decade, there'll be a fair whack of linux machines with a fair whack of non-nerd users.
Finally, why you'd write anything in any language you can't cross-compile without great expense or redevelopment I just don't understand.
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
So computer programs appear out of thin air? They don't require programmers, artists or project managers? With automobiles, there's heavy costs on both design and production. With software, almost all of the cost is shifted to design... but there's still significant cost that needs to be recouped.
Re: (Score:3)
Like this [kickstarter.com], or this [kickstarter.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
The initial version, patches, support, and other infrastructure are all labor that go into making the software. In additions to all this, there are fringe costs, such as the building, power, computers, administrative support, social security fees, and so forth. The fact that the marginal cost of production is zero is neither here nor there. Investments must be recouped, or there will be no investments to speak of.
Re: (Score:2)
Trolls work on the myth/legend system. They work because in the back of your mind you know people who believe that.
There are people I know who are so cheap that they attempted to use a slice of PVC pipe for their wedding ring because they feel jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones. Not that different than people who feel organized bits are a racket. In the eyes of the company, he is the best procurement employee they've ever had.
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Funny)
There are people I know who are so cheap that they attempted to use a slice of PVC pipe for their wedding ring because they feel jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones.
The weird thing is, they're right. The jewelry industry is a racket to sell shiny stones. How is it that they're smart enough to figure that out, but not smart enough to realize that replacing it with plastic is even stupider?
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's kind of sad that you're defined by an operating system. Reminds me a bit of the Amish. Their level of technology is a big part of who they are, so they go without modern conveniences (including video games) just to stick to that. All fine and dandy, but you don't hear the Amish complaining that nobody makes spoilers compatible with their buggies because it's a lifestyle choice.
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, there's a huge thread on that very subject in the Amish Buggy Customization forum, but since the responses are carved on a rock out in a field in PA, you probably missed it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's kind of sad that you're defined by an operating system. Reminds me a bit of the Amish.
If you keep talking about the Amish that way, you're going to offend them and they'll stop visiting Slashdot! You insensitive clod...
All fine and dandy, but you don't hear the Amish complaining that nobody makes spoilers compatible with their buggies because it's a lifestyle choice.
It's much harder to entertain that asinine entitlement mentality when eating fried chicken means going to the coop and wringing its neck yourself*. If for some reason they thought aerodynamic lift was a problem for their buggies and wanted a spoiler, they'd make one themselves.
* What I really appreciate are people who can enjoy modern conveniences without becoming soft,
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's much harder to entertain that asinine entitlement mentality when eating fried chicken means going to the coop and wringing its neck yourself*
Now, I have a few Mennonite friends who've explained this to me, and from my understanding, this is exactly the point. Religion aside, the Amish culture values hard work, cooperation, and human interaction above worldly things like material goods, entertainment, and wealth. Putting in a good day's work to produce something is valued more in their society than coming home to a store-bought meal and the latest TV show.
In that way, Linux fans are much like the Amish. Open-source developers often contribute not for money, but for the pride in having contributed to a larger goal. Sure, there are some who sell their open code to earn money, just as there are Amish who have cars, phones, and radios to interact with the world outside their hometown.
It is the ideals we live by, not the technology we use, that truly defines who we are. Linux embodies a certain set of ideals, that the OP claims to live by.
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)
I've heard of a few Mennonite cultures that allow them to work at call centers and the like (their use of technology is accepted as its part of earning a living) and the supervisors love them because they work very hard, take pride in doing a good job and never complain. My only complaint is that they let their kids play in the road far too much, I've almost hit a few of them on blind curves and hills when traveling through the backwoods.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, that's not really how the Amish relationship with technology works. They don't eschew technology because it is technology, but rather they eschew some technology because they feel it doesn't facilitate community/interpersonal relationships with people or a relationship with god, or, even if it does, in some cases the disadvantages are not worth it. When technology doesn't impinge on those things and if it is sufficiently needful they use it.
I met an Amish who owns a computer and uses a cellphone f
Re: (Score:3)
Didn't think so, therefore I'm not interested.
It runs on the PS3, and the PS3 (sort of) runs Linux.
*ducks*
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Linux use for the desktop is at around 1%
2. 25% of that 1% are Open Source Zealots who will not pay for a program that isn't open source.
3. 25% of that 1% are just too cheap to buy software.
4. 25% of what is left isn't interested in games.
5. 15% Will just Duel Boot/Virtualize/Wine to play the Windows version of the game.
Leaving 10% of that 1% (0.1%) of sales. Of the product. Is that worth having to program a port, have support trained, and testing and bug fixing for that platform?
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Interesting)
Where do the Humble Bundle stats fit in with your assertions?
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nowhere, if he's interested in actual market research, rather than a publicity stunt.
Re: (Score:2)
Nowhere, if he's interested in actual market research, rather than a publicity stunt.
Heh, that's it...go for "market research" when you don't like what the real world figures say!
Re: (Score:2)
#4 is probably true, at least in my case, since I stopped buying the HIB when I fired up Shank and got a nice, putrescent EA logo for my efforts.
Either that, or I just don't like being falsely advertised to. Maybe that's it.
Re: (Score:2)
Where do the Humble Bundle stats fit in with your assertions?
It fits in nicely, I've bought two of them as all computers in my house have Linux on them.
Also there's the little fact that Linux users on average will pay more for the game unless Humble Bundle stats lie.
Re:Yeah but does it work on Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is that worth having to program a port, have support trained, and testing and bug fixing for that platform?
Probably not, although Blizzard has stated before that having a Mac port of their games has sometimes helped fixed bugs in the Windows version as well. Blizzard also has a habit of making dual DirectX and OpenGL rendering engines, so they probably are closer than most other companies would be to making a port.
Re: (Score:2)
Blizzard also has a habit of making dual DirectX and OpenGL rendering engines, so they probably are closer than most other companies would be to making a port.
Blizzard is not going to port the game to Linux, and they're not going to officially support Linux/Wine as a platform.
However, Blizzard has worked with Wine and Transgaming to fix issues specific to their games -- in particular WoW, which ran great on Wine. Also, while D2 always worked pretty damn well except for Battlenet, recently even that has worked.
I'm a Linux-exclusive gamer. I understand that means I won't be able to play all the games I might want to. But the odds are better than most that D3 wil
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's closer to 0.63% last time I checked (and dropping), but I suppose 1% is close enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking as a Linux user, there has always been problems with third party programs in Linux, nonstandard installers, manual updating and so on. I, and I'm probably not the only one very seldom install third party software in my operating system (something not in the distro). I know if I use the distro supplied packages the system will work, like forever. I've seen (and used) Windows installes which have crawled to an halt in a year, mac likewise (although some would say this can't be). I've never seen a Lin
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I know you're just throwing numbers out there, but the way you arrived at your figure is flawed. You claim that Linux use on the desktop is 1%; okay, fine, I can live with that. You then go on to show that only a fraction of those Linux users are interested in games, and that fraction of the total computer population is the market size.
Your assertion that this is then 0.1% of sales presumes that 100% of the non-Linux market is interested in games, which is clearly not the case. That is, in order to make