Thoughts on Diablo III?

MobBoss said:

There is a direct correlation with quality and popularity. Games that really suck are never popular. Just my humble opinion of course.

Click to expand...

It's obviously not so simple. Otherwise, you'd be forced to admit that all manner of crappy popular music, for example, are of high quality just because they're popular.

A product that relies a lot on brand name needs a healthy dose of skepticism from a discerning consumer, not faith. It makes economic sense.

Also fun and popular =/= high quality either.

Thrawn said:

I had some stuff typed up but then I decided not to bother, this argument is just going round in circles.

I could care less about the RMAH, even if I pick up D3, it's not going to effect how I enjoy or play the game in the slightest.

Click to expand...

Unless your internet goes down

Well the internet going down effects more than just gaming.

aelf said:

It's obviously not so simple. Otherwise, you'd be forced to admit that all manner of crappy popular music, for example, are of high quality just because they're popular.

A product that relies a lot on brand name needs a healthy dose of skepticism from a discerning consumer, not faith. It makes economic sense.

Click to expand...

Gaming isnt analogous to music. Or if it is at all, it is only on a very small level.

As to your faith vs skepticism comment: I'm financially stable enough to where I dont live hand to mouth and 50 bucks makes such a difference if I pick up a game I later realize isnt that great. That doesnt mean I just buy games willy nilly no notice - I use demos and betas to often determine if a game is for me or not.

But just like I had confidence that Blizzard would deliver on Starcraft 2 (and they did in spades), I have a lot of confidence that Diablo 3 will be another quality game from a quality gaming company.

There has to be a point where 'brand loyalty' does indeed matter, if it is earned. In my particular opinion, its been earned by Blizzard.

Now if you desire to be all edgy and kewl, I guess you can really try to argue how WoW sucks regardless of how wildly popular and successful its been. Just be prepared for your opinion to be trivialized to the point it should be.

MobBoss said:

Oh, I'm sorry, but WoW wasnt my life I guess. It was a game to me, not my reason for being.

Click to expand...

And you're the one trying to give lesson in being civil ?

Anyway, your answers were mostly missing (again) the point, or purposefully dancing around, so it's a waste of time. Keep being blind and believe that raw numbers = quality if it makes you feel better.

(btw, Facebook games dwarf even WoW in term of players, I guess it proves that they are the best game ever made ! )

MobBoss said:

Gaming isnt analogous to music. Or if it is at all, it is only on a very small level.

Click to expand...

I don't see any conceivable reason why popular != good applies to one but not the other.

MobBoss said:

As to your faith vs skepticism comment: I'm financially stable enough to where I dont live hand to mouth and 50 bucks makes such a difference if I pick up a game I later realize isnt that great. That doesnt mean I just buy games willy nilly no notice - I use demos and betas to often determine if a game is for me or not.

But just like I had confidence that Blizzard would deliver on Starcraft 2 (and they did in spades), I have a lot of confidence that Diablo 3 will be another quality game from a quality gaming company.

There has to be a point where 'brand loyalty' does indeed matter, if it is earned. In my particular opinion, its been earned by Blizzard.

Click to expand...

Hey, if you can afford to readily spend 50 bucks on things that seem appealing, then good for you. I only said it makes economic sense to be skeptical of hype. Some people throw money around because they can, but it still doesn't make economic sense. Unlike some other consumers, though, I'm not fighting some cause. I think it's stupid that you trust a brand so much, but I don't care that you do. You are feeding the corporate machine, but there are plenty of other people who do that anyway, so it makes no difference whether you do or not. I'm kinda fine with leaving you to it.

MobBoss said:

Now if you desire to be all edgy and kewl, I guess you can really try to argue how WoW sucks regardless of how wildly popular and successful its been. Just be prepared for your opinion to be trivialized to the point it should be.

Click to expand...

Wow, what joke this comment is. Quite fitting as something spoken by a fanboy, I guess.

Well, there is obviously a lot more variety in music, with many more genres and very different methods/modes of music. Video games dont come near to comparing with music in that scope. In consideration of that, there is going to be even more differing opinion on what is 'good' or not, and what is 'quality' or not. Bottom line, there arent that many gaming companies that create games just for the sheer art of it as opposed to seeking profit, while there are indeed a great many musicians who have that attitude about their music.

And i'm fully aware of games that just dont meet the hype. Case in point: Duke Nukem 4ever. Didnt buy it, and was highly disappointed that it tanked the way it did.

My point about trust is this: giving a brand your 'trust' isnt a bad thing as long as it is deserving of that trust. Once that trust is broken, you are absolutely right, and its very hard to regain that trust. I dont give it out to many companies, and its a very short list indeed. But again, trust shouldnt be a bad thing if it is truly deserving.

Again, simply being a fanboi doesnt make one wrong or incorrect. I mean I dont play WoW anymore, and you're not going to see me making youtube videos ranting in favor of the game. Its a game, a product, and I got more than my monies worth out of it for a long time. I dont see why admitting that having fun and getting value out of a well made game equates to one being a fanboi, but /whatever.

I also never got why people really try to deny that quality does ring true, and will result in something being wildly popular. The industry is full of flops that were just awful and didnt go anywhere, whereas good quality games generally are indeed successful and popular. Are some good games under-rated? Sure, but that doesnt disprove the point that really great games are indeed really popular.

MobBoss said:

Now if you desire to be all edgy and kewl, I guess you can really try to argue how WoW sucks regardless of how wildly popular and successful its been. Just be prepared for your opinion to be trivialized to the point it should be.

Click to expand...

I take it you're also a Justin Bieber fan? You know, since popularity is the only thing that counts and criticism is trivial at that point.

LightSpectra said:

I take it you're also a Justin Bieber fan? You know, since popularity is the only thing that counts and criticism is trivial at that point.

Click to expand...

If you think this is what I am saying then you're not getting my point.

But to address your point, you are now arguing personal taste as opposed to quality. They arent the same thing. I may not be a Justin Bieber fanboy, but I can acknowledge his success and popularity and the kid wouldnt be where he is if he wasnt talented and people didnt find quality in his music. The point being, just because his music doesnt make me go bananas doesnt mean his music isnt good/quality.

Well, if your point is that something can be terrible and still become wildly popular because people generally cannot identify egregious flaws in games like World of Warcraft, then I agree completely.

LightSpectra said:

Well, if your point is that something can be terrible and still become wildly popular because people generally cannot identify egregious flaws in games like World of Warcraft, then I agree completely.

Click to expand...

And....you missed the point entirely.

Something 'terrible' isnt going to be wildly popular.

WoW just isnt 'terrible' its actually a very, very good game. Has been for a very long time now, but as in all things that age, the shine is starting to wear off. And fwiw, I really have no clue as to why that is so hard for some to admit. I'm not saying its perfect, because its not, but come on, you dont become as successful as WoW has by being 'terrible'.

Blizzard has been coasting on their reputation for quite a while.

The people that made Diablo I and II, Starcraft and Warcraft I to III are long gone.

WoW started off well but now has degenerated to mass market casualized crap.

Starcraft II was the first Blizzard game in a long, long time that people started even questioning the quality of. Also, region locking started then. When all three games are released, for the pleasure of playing someone anywhere in the world, it will cost you $900. Total horsesh*t.

Diablo III is looking like more mass market casualized crap. BS region locking also made it into their game, no mods so you have to buy and play their content only.

Also, the Battlenet forums are absolutely horrendous. Populated for the most part by little Blizzard fanbois with attitude problems.

I think the most common phrase on there is "You're a f***ing re***d!"

Constructive critique of their games is not allowed. It'll get you warnings and bans so quick it'll make your head spin. Reminds me of Germany in the late 1930s.

This is not the same company it used to be and the game quality is going downhill. it used to be a friendly little company that loved making games. Make a great game and the profit will happen was their motto. Now it's all about milking the consumer the Activision way.

The real decline seemed to set in right after Activision came on the scene. Coincidence? I think not.

MobBoss said:

And....you missed the point entirely.

Something 'terrible' isnt going to be wildly popular.

Click to expand...

MobBoss said:

you dont become as successful as WoW has by being 'terrible'.

Click to expand...

So, why aren't you a Justin Bieber fanboy again?

I'll give you a hint: Bieber isn't popular solely for his musical skills, just like certain video games aren't popular solely because of their quality.

To your claim that Blizzard is just coasting:

How does that explain how great Starcraft 2 is?

Answer: it doesnt.

Seriously, I think the vast majority of your complaints are just hyper-inflated nitpicking at best. For example, that 'region locking' thing you refer to on Starcraft 2. Big whoopee. Thats a very minor nitpick, almost not even worth making a big deal over.

And really....a comparison of their forums to 1930s Germany? Seriously? Rofl. Wow.

I simply dont agree with you about their game quality going downhill. They more than met my expectations with Starcraft 2, both the single player campaign and the multi-player online.

I guess the old adage is indeed true. You just cant please everyone. But you can still please enough to where you are still a wildly successful gaming company creating high quality games for *most* people to enjoy.

LightSpectra said:

So, why aren't you a Justin Bieber fanboy again?

Click to expand...

Just because his style of music isnt my thing doesnt mean I dont think he is a talented musician/singer.

I'll give you a hint: Bieber isn't popular solely for his musical skills, just like certain video games aren't popular solely because of their quality.

Click to expand...

And pray tell, who is the final arbiter of that quality you speak of?

MobBoss said:

And pray tell, who is the final arbiter of that quality you speak of?

Click to expand...

I could answer this, but all I really have to say is what it isn't: majority opinion.

MobBoss said:

And....you missed the point entirely.

Something 'terrible' isnt going to be wildly popular.

Click to expand...

Several examples of "terrible" things being very popular have been given, you've just completely ignored them.

WoW just isnt 'terrible' its actually a very, very good game. Has been for a very long time now, but as in all things that age, the shine is starting to wear off. And fwiw, I really have no clue as to why that is so hard for some to admit. I'm not saying its perfect, because its not, but come on, you dont become as successful as WoW has by being 'terrible'.

Click to expand...

WoW was great at the start, but became terrible by appealing to the lowest common denominator.
Which is exactly how you can be terrible and popular at the same time, BTW.

LightSpectra said:

So, why aren't you a Justin Bieber fanboy again?

Click to expand...

Well, he argued that music and games don't work the same way, but his argument doesn't really explain much.

MobBoss said:

Well, there is obviously a lot more variety in music, with many more genres and very different methods/modes of music. Video games dont come near to comparing with music in that scope. In consideration of that, there is going to be even more differing opinion on what is 'good' or not, and what is 'quality' or not. Bottom line, there arent that many gaming companies that create games just for the sheer art of it as opposed to seeking profit, while there are indeed a great many musicians who have that attitude about their music.

Click to expand...

This sounds like you're simply reaffirming your assumption that popularity means quality, except now you're also saying that there is a need to consider the market share that a product has: There are more people who don't like Justin Bieber than those who don't like WoW, so it's harder to establish that the former is good.

I agree that the prevalence of disagreements is a strong evidence against a universal standard of good, but it doesn't follow from this that the relative lack of disagreements shows the opposite. There is no reason to claim that a large majority of people thinking something is good means that something must be good (more on this below). Again, you're only assuming that, and your argument that the market in music works differently only allows you to escape the charge that you think Justin Bieber, for example, is good. It doesn't explain the mystifying assumption that your argument is predicated on.

MobBoss said:

I also never got why people really try to deny that quality does ring true, and will result in something being wildly popular. The industry is full of flops that were just awful and didnt go anywhere, whereas good quality games generally are indeed successful and popular. Are some good games under-rated? Sure, but that doesnt disprove the point that really great games are indeed really popular.

Click to expand...

I never got why something being popular necessarily means it's good. Yeah, sometimes and maybe often things are popular because they are good. But in those cases, popularity is only symptomatic of something being good. Popularity isn't the sole criterion of goodness; the criteria for goodness need not even include popularity. The popular = good argument sucks because it's just circular logic. Something is popular because it's good (may be true), but something is good because it's popular (eh?).

aelf said:

Well, he argued that music and games don't work the same way, but his argument doesn't make much sense.

Click to expand...

My point on that is that there are way more choices in music than in video games, thus issues of taste, quality and popularity dont translate as well as they could.

lightspectra said:

I could answer this, but all I really have to say is what it isn't: majority opinion.

Click to expand...

My opinion is that quality is determined by each individuals own criteria; and given that, I would tend to view majority opinion as a much better indicator of said quality than some disgruntled nay-sayers.

Akka said:

WoW was great at the start, but became terrible by appealing to the lowest common denominator.

Click to expand...

This sounds to me like your complaint against WoW was its downplaying of elitism and catering more to the casual gamer.

Actually, my opinion is the opposite, WoW generally got better over time, not worse. One of my worst complaints from the earlier days of WoW is the time sink a 40 man dungeon run was due to the class needs and coordination it took. My life just got to where I couldnt sit around for 4 to 5 hours to do a molten core run. Later tools like the dungeon finder, summoning stones, etc. etc. made it much more enjoyable, and less of a time sink. Those type of additions only got better with time. Sure there were continual class balancing issues and skill tree changes, but that goes without saying for any game that continually tries to raise the bar, challenge and level caps for its player base.

WoW was a lot of things, but it was never 'terrible'.

Anyway, enough of this on WoW and quality vs popularity. This is a D3 thread.

A great article (6 parts) on the creation of Battlenet 2.0

http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/the-creation-of-battle-net-2-0-part-one

MobBoss said:

My opinion is that quality is determined by each individuals own criteria; and given that, I would tend to view majority opinion as a much better indicator of said quality than some disgruntled nay-sayers.

Click to expand...

I hope you don't use that as a life-philosophy, since it doesn't make much sense. It means the trend followers are always right and the trend setters are wrong, until they bring the former into line. Innovation and invention doesn't frequently come with people satisfied with the status quo; it comes from the critics who want better.