-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
STEAM- Announcements & Updates 2011 Edition
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
- Status
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
You called out people for making exceptions for Blizzard games and then named a particular one to prove your point. Protip Twit, don't make an argument that is based on one game that you cherry pick from the lot.Twig said:
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Pot meet kettle.Twig said:Your only argument is to insult me.
We're done here.
marrec said:
You can activate it on EADM which is nearly identical to Steam in terms of core features. You can do this with any EA game you have to skip the disc check if it's a boxed copy. There are unlimited downloads on both EADM and Amazon. EADM is a nice little launcher though and it installs the games when it downloads like Steam.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Sorry Twit if you feel that I am angry but if thats what ya need to get you through ok.Twig said:
Ya, you can't really compare Blizzard games to most other PC games. I just logged onto Diablo 2 Bnet and 48k people are currently playing. The same number as Portal 2, which is currently the most played game on Steam. Portal 2 is 4 days old, Diablo 2 is 11 years old. Warcraft 3 has 38k people logged in.
Syphon Filter
Member
kswiston said:
Holy crap,didn't know that many played daibl0 II. Counter strike 1.6 can compete with it though.
That right there, that's what I'm talking about. Diablo 2 has been bettered multiple times since its release, yet you'll find no shortage of people saying it's STILL the best game like it. It's ridiculous. And sad. Blizzard fanaticism knows no bounds. I used to be like that, so I know how it is. Luckily, I grew up.kswiston said:
Twig said:
I'm sort of confused. Are you accusing me of fanticism? I have D2 installed on my PC (along with about 400 other games), but I haven't really played the game in a couple years. Just logged on to see how many people were still playing.
The fact that so many people continue to play Diablo 2 over Titan Quest or Torchlight, or whatever is exactly the point though. Regardless of your personal opinion of Blizzard and their games, everything they develop has a longevity that no one else in the industry can match. Instead of 3-12 months with an active community before slowly fading into obscurity, Blizzard games have large, dedicated fan bases playing their titles a decade after launch. You can sink 6 months into a blizzard game, give it up for 1-2 years, come back and STILL have a ton of people waiting to play with you.
If I was going to pay $60 for a PC game, it doesn't seem crazy to choose a game that will be supported by its developer and userbase for the next 5-10 years over one that will be abandoned in 6-12 months.
Gvaz said:
Actually people who wanted SC2 to be like Broodwar complained that it wasn't enough like Broodwar but got over it pretty quickly. People who wanted a Relic RTS complained that it was too much like Broodwar, mostly because those people suck at real RTS and don't like games that make them feel incompetent.
Blizzard games ARE the best, that's why people like them so much. Diablo 2 STILL has no equal in the genre. Titan Quest just isn't as good, it lacks the visual clarity of Diablo 2 (especially for health, it's really hard to see both your health bar and the action going on at the same time, this issue didn't exist with Diablo 2), it's stagnant maps don't offer the variety of the rearranging maps of Diablo 2 (it's too easy to beeline in NG+ Titan Quest since everything is in exactly the same place), and the loot system was certainly vastly inferior. Also, Diablo 2's method of quickly switching skills through hotkeys was better than the really terrible method that Titan Quest had. Diablo 2 had 7 completely unique and visually distinct classes. Titan Quest had male and female stock hero. Titan Quest only did graphics technology better than Diablo 2, which isn't saying much considering it came out about a decade after. It supposedly offered dozens of classes, but it was just mixing and matching skill trees out of a pool of 8 or so, resulting in classes that all felt very samey.
Oh, and Diablo 2 had closed battle.net, server side storage of characters and loot, so duping and character hacking wasn't anywhere near as rampant as in every Diablo clone since. It still happened a bit, but most of the time the items would get deleted and accounts banned. Much better than Titan Quest where joining an online game you would end up beside a hacked character with hacked loot half the time.
No. Unless you are a fanatic. But, no, I wasn't.kswiston said:
My issue is not with people continuing to play Blizzard games. It is with them playing Blizzard games to the exclusion of everything else.
Even if Torchlight 2 - which will have multiplayer, the only thing the first game was really missing - ends up being the objectively superior game in every possible way (and if I'm honest, I don't think it will), it will never be as popular as Diablo 3, simply because Diablo 3 is a Blizzard game.
I mean, I am still a Blizzard fan, and I will
Twig said:
No. Torchlight 2 won't be the superior game, and it won't be as popular as Diablo 3 because it won't have closed Battle.net. The online environment in Blizzard games is so vastly superior to it's competitors it's like nobody is seriously competing with them. Battle.net has existed for 13 years and nobody has tried to create a legitimate competitor to it for Diablo-clone or RTS games. Why should people buy and play an inferior online experience just because it's not Blizzard?
Company of Heroes was favored by a lot of people because it had realistic WW2 setting and was a much easier game to play than Blizzard RTS. However, CoH's online was SHIT. There is just no comparison. Even the patching process was ridiculously bad. It's like nobody has ever actually tried to compete with Blizzard, so Blizzard wins by default because they're still putting out the features and polish that gamers want.
Starcraft 2 in beta was more polished than released RTS games.
It doesn't matter to the Blizzard diehards because 90% of them probably never go looking into the same genre for alternatives. Sure, people who play WoW might splash the odd CoD or Portal, but will they look for another MMO? I doubt most Diablo players have any clue or care about Torchlight, TQ, etc, because Diablo fulfills everything for them, at least until D3 comes, and someone removes all the rainbows in the first patch.Twig said:
Sober said:
People who play Diablo 2 have most definitely tried other Diablo clones. I have. None of them has been as good a complete package.
It really seems like nobody is actually competing with Blizzard. They just move out of the way. Why has no RTS or Diablo-clone come out boasting a Battle.net type system in 13 years? Why should gamers used to a higher standard settle for anything less? I played CoH, DoW2, Halo Wars, C&C3 Red Alert, Sacred 2, Titan Quest, Torchlight, and none of those games are superior to their Blizzard competition. They all have a collection of flaws that add up to a weaker overall experience, usually related to control/interface polish and online.
Yes, Battlenet is absolutely the best constistent thing Blizzard games have going for them.Zzoram said:
It's not enough. I mean, it clearly is, or you wouldn't be here defending them as if you owned stock in their company, but it's not enough. I care significantly more about the core gameplay mechanics than I do about a perfectly smooth online service.
Awesome!
Yeah, I know. ):Sober said:
There is absolutely no fucking way any sane person could defend Diablo 2's interface in this day and age. That is the primary reason Diablo 2 has been superceded. It is legitimately archaic in the world of video games.Zzoram said:
Twig said:
The core gameplay mechanics of Diablo 2 are better than Titan Quest. Even the interface is better and it's 10 years older. I've played both games several times, Diablo 2 is just better overall.
Same with all the other RTS games, none of them are as competitive as Blizzard RTS and none of them boast the robust map editor that leads to the variety of fun custom games that always show up in a Blizzard RTS.
Twig said:
Play Titan Quest and Diablo 2 in the same day. Try hotkey 8 spells and rotate quickly between them in combat. It's easier in Diablo 2. That is kinda really important in this genre.
Try watching killing a mob of enemies and watching the action. Can you also tell your health without looking away from the action? You can in Diablo, you can't in Titan Quest. That is kinda really important in this genre. I want to look at the action not stare at the corner to watch my tiny health bar so I don't die. The giant colourful orbs for Diablo 2 were closer to the center of the screen and their size and colour make them useful in your peripheral vision even when looking directly at the center of the screen. Not true of the super thin tucked far into the corner health bar of Titan Quest.
Inertia at this point probably. They got into Bnet so early on it's practically become a staple and it's impossible to unseat because of the playerbase and probably because of costs. You are right though, other matchmaking services for other RTS's have been super garbage, ranging from Gamespy bad to Reliconline MEH.Zzoram said:
I mean, let's be honest, BNet is really the only real reason Blizzard can stay in spotlight without having to even try anything super innovative. We can argue this all day, but clearly, for example, SC2 is fundamentally SC1 with updated graphics and WoW is EQ done and iterated really well. Blizzard doesn't need to flash innovation around or try their hand at something different when they have a ready-made playerbase ready to gobble it up.
Sober said:
I was never a huge Diablo or Starcraft player, but I have played enough WoW to know that isn't the case. WoW is going on 7 years old now. Most people who have been playing since the beginning have tried out several MMOs over the years. However, after they reach endgame, they are inevitably bored by the lack of content and return to WoW. WoW becomes their fallback game.
While they aren't always very innovative, Blizzard games are a lot more thought out and balanced than the majority of other titles. Their post-launch support is also without peer. I think that is why people keep returning to the games for so long.
Twig said:
When you buy Dawn of War 2 you get Dawn of War 2 and Last Stand.
When you buy Starcraft 2,you get Starcraft 2, Aiur Chef, Starjewelled, Left 2 Die, SoIS (dota-clone), a constantly growing pool of thousands of interesting variants of Tower Defense many of which are better than the $10-20 games being sold standalone, a constantly growing pool of interesting variants of Hero Defense (Last Stand is from this genre), a constantly growing pool of variants of RPGs and Open RPGs, whatever the hell you call that genre where 1 player is a super strong bad guy that can level up guarding a treasure and everyone else is harvesting and building stuff and trying to steal treasure to use it to get better stuff until they eventually can kill the bad guy or all die trying, Uther Party type mini-game compilations where you compete for top prize, evolution type games where you are all some kind of animal and eat different animal/plant combos to evolve along different lines eventually trying to kill the other players, Jurassic Park type games where you play as survivors building up defense from increasingly powerful waves of dinosaurs until the helicopter arrives at a random spot then have to survive the trip to the helicopter, etc, etc.
There is just no comparison. People aren't stupid for buying Blizzard games. Blizzard games are unmatched in quality content per dollar.
You list all those mods as if they're not available anywhere else, often for free, and better done. Some of them are exclusive-ish, but most are not. And, no, I'm not going to go through your list and find a counterpart for each one.
But my blind screaming rage is in regards to your fanboyish allegiance to Diablo 2's fucking awful interface. SC2's mod scene is pretty rad, if a little too prohibitive. Source's is way better. Way, way, way better. (Except in terms of distribution. Even Valve could stand to learn a lesson or two from Battle.net.)
But my blind screaming rage is in regards to your fanboyish allegiance to Diablo 2's fucking awful interface. SC2's mod scene is pretty rad, if a little too prohibitive. Source's is way better. Way, way, way better. (Except in terms of distribution. Even Valve could stand to learn a lesson or two from Battle.net.)
Only one category. Even within all the hardcore raiders I've ran with, yes, a few of them always try to jump ship to a new MMO and always come back. The rest (which I found seemed to be the majority), honestly, they only play WoW and their eyes (or ears anyway) glaze over when you start talking about other games and they just leave the vent channel.kswiston said:
Oh, I think I've played WoW enough to know Blizzard has a tendency for taking forever to listen to the community. And personally, PvP has ruined any sense of balance, but not that I care. Also, "Paladin tanks don't need a proper taunt, or interrupt", etc., but that's best left to that WoW thread I think. But then again I always ran with the raiders, so I dunno how joe six-pack thinks how balanced the game is when he decides to log on and chat and do some dailies, to be fair.
Twig said:
You say things like "way better" but then throw in the wrench of poor distribution. Why do you think people like Battle.net? It makes downloading all these things easy, and playing with other people easy. It's like the argument of PC vs console, more people play games on console because it's easy and they don't have to read a manual to figure out how to install a mod. Same deal with Battle.net, you just click a new Tower Defense game with a strange name, you automatically download it, and you can play it with other people in 15 seconds. That system holds a lot of value to the end user. Because it's so easy, it becomes accessible to the masses, and is better because people who want to use it can actually use it. Sure you can do more stuff with Source, but not as much is being done with it because it's too hard to distribute your work once you're done, and nobody wants to spend a year making some cool new game or genre that only 10 people will ever play.
Many of the genres spawned in Blizzard map editors are completely unique and have since spun off into standalone games, while many do remain exclusive.
You keep calling out fanboyish allegiance to Diablo 2, but I gave specific examples of why I think it's better than Titan Quest and you never respond with examples of the many games you claim have surpassed Diablo 2's interface.
Vincent Alexander
Member
Just want to say that Starcraft 2 multiplayer (and I've played a lot of the variants) feels sluggish and boring as shite after playing Supreme Commander.
It's a great place, ain't it?Twig said:
Twig said:
How can I dismiss your arguments when you have none?
"Diablo 2's interface is bad and archaic!"
Why?
"Because!"
You were given examples of why its interface is better than TQ, yet you ignore them.
"All those maps are available elsewhere, and in better form!"
Can you give any examples
"No I'm not going to take the time to do that."
Anyways I disregarded my own advice and didn't ignore you. Enough of that.
1. Putting people on ignore is a lame way to ignore what you don't want to hear.Twig said:
2. WoW's balance? HAHAHA SINCE FUCKING WHEN
Wow is totally balanced *dks can solo TWO cataclysm hard mode bosses at the same time, Kaelthalas, top the charts in raids, and generally need to be nerfed into the ground* so what do they do? "hrm, yeah the dps is a little low, lets buff some major ability" - is Ghostcrawler
Vincent Alexander
Member
Yeah...poor choice of words. I just meant the overall pacing felt slow. SupCom2 is a much faster game. And truthfully, I hate that I've gotten used to it. Old me would've loved Starcraft 2 online. I've just grown too used to SupCom2's resource system and the ability to flood the screen with units.Zzoram said:
TheExodu5 said:
Agreed. Do we have a thread for discussing RTS games in general? I'd love a place to chat.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
And the strategic zoom, no doubt. SupCom has ruined many RTS games for me.Vincent Alexander said:
Still, I don't think Battlenet and Steam are direct competitors. It's a weird argument to be having in the Steam thread.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Ehh doesn't he hold the title for most times being banned? Not surprising. Anyhow Blizzards games have a following for good reason. Unfortunately not all can accept this and instead need to troll and rag on those very individuals. Eh.TheExodu5 said:
- Status