Diablo 3 - Why So Many People Hated It

I can see the appeal of a real money auction house, I mean, who wouldn't want free cash for playing a game?

But when you think about it, and when you look at the reality, you've got two options:

1. Grind like it's a full-time job to make money, but, in reality, the time spent in a full-time job would actually garner you a lot more money - and when you start treating grinding as a job instead of as a game it changes the way you play, changes the things you find interesting, changes your basic motivation.

2. Get lucky. Treat it as a form of lottery. I guess this is how the people that can play normally and not get hooked on the money would treat it, those that were fine with it while not being 'workers'. But these games always have pretty hyper inflation to the point where only the best of the best is worth much, so it's unlikely many people will ever get that golden drop, so what's the point really, at least with a no-money auction house the size of your wallet doesn't permit you auto-perfection.

If someone was so inclined they could just load-up, buy everything they wanted before they even start playing and job done. While it doesn't matter that people can do this and they probably could with the non-RMAH if they went on the black market, it suggests a change of spirit in that the 'governors' of your environment are endorsing pay-to-win, whereas with a black market at least there's an 'atmosphere' of fair-play.

Most of the problems with it relate to people concerned about what other people are doing, which some people would think is childish and be able to ignore it, but that's the kind of thing humans do get really worked up about, no matter how 'aloof' you remain to all the flying emotions.

The perceived problem came about, primarily, because of the issues relating to the release state balance of the game, which pretty much required use of the AH for certain classes to succeed in later Inferno levels.

Of course, that has since been fixed - but the rage against RMAH was so massive that Blizzard caved. I also imagine that the legal implications of dealing with real money in a game, in multiple countries, became somewhat unwieldy for Blizzard - or so it was hinted at on their forums.

Since it's almost entirely PvE oriented - there's really no victory to pay for, though there will always be people arguing against the option to pay for progression.

But that's the known reality for most established games of this nature, including Blizzard's very own WoW - where gold selling is rampant and where you can buy your way to a lot of desirable items - though that's less about pure power and more about prestige stuff that seems to be just as important to a lot of people.

That said, as I've said before - I think the smart way to handle this would be to make the RMAH (as well as the gold AH) an optional feature selected at character creation. Much like hardcore characters.

Just make RMAH people play with other RMAH people - and allow the people concerned with the feature to tick that feature off upon creation.

As for full-time work versus luck - I can't really agree with that perception. Luck would be part of the equation no matter what, in any case.

I would play it for fun - and I would consider the RMAH an added incentive to optimise my character and I would have a reason to be an efficient killer, which I don't really have once the game is beaten at Torment 6.

Even if I did consider it work - it would be a perfect match for my lazy game-obsessed nature - and if I could make a living optimising character builds and finding phat l00t - I'd go that way without thinking about it

Since time is a lot more interesting to me than money, I would never focus on any game as a job - unless I was having fun. I'm sure some would, though.

Great post, Dart!

Ah Dart, you understand nothing my young padawan.

People were angry because only way to get any good drops was through RMAH. People wanted to get drops by playing the game but Blizzard made it so that was hard so to force people to use both auction house and RMAH.

As I said, the perception was that you needed to use the AH for the best items - which is really where Blizzard screwed up, because while you didn't have to use it - it was much faster, even with the gold AH. That made the game about major farming for people who didn't feel like using the RMAH - which a lot of people didn't like.

Well, really, the major way they screwed up was by not including good drops at all - just boring stat increases. That's what they fixed with the loot 2.0 patch, which made legendaries desirable.

I found legendaries without the AH - but they mostly sucked, so that wasn't much help. I also succeeded in Inferno without using the AH at first, but it was too grindy and frustrating.

Ironically, that's exactly what Diablo 2 was like - it was just a lot less convenient because the AH wasn't there, and people had to resort to the hassle of trading with established items of value.

That's why they should have separated the AH from the non-AH players - and balanced loot drops much like they've done today, so that people without access to the AH would play exactly as people are all playing today.

Today, you wouldn't need the AH for progression, but you could still sell the most desirable legendaries and set items for a decent profit.

Obviously, however, there would still be a vocal minority against that - but I don't believe developers should skew their vision for those.

But that's just my opinion.

I played both D2 and D3, D2 was not like D3. In D2 I felt like I got items of value for my character as I played alone from lvl 1 to end of Act 5 Hell.

Diablo 2 was about farming/trading for many people at later levels, which is the only part of the game I'm talking about here.

I'm a big fan of Diablo 2 - and just like you could succeed alone in Hell act 5 - you could succeed in Inferno in Diablo 3, it just meant a lot of grinding or a lot of luck with drops.

That, or you could have one of the easier classes - like the Necromancer. Much like Diablo 3 - where the Demon Hunter was the easiest through Inferno.

Lest we forget, the point is that the AH was never the problem - the awful loot was the problem.

The way they "fixed" the game was to improve the loot and the drops - not by taking away the AH entirely.

That said, I'm still not happy with the loot system - as the core is still rather unimaginative - and the way weapons simply tie into your skills as DPS sticks is weak and bland design.

But the way they've added so much unique stuff to legendaries and set items is really beyond comparison. No other game has as many game-changing items, which is why I recommend trying the game again.

DArtagnan said:

Diablo 2 was about farming/trading for many people at later levels, which is the only part of the game I'm talking about here.

I'm a big fan of Diablo 2 - and just like you could succeed alone in Hell act 5 - you could succeed in Inferno in Diablo 3, it just meant a lot of grinding or a lot of luck with drops.

That, or you could have one of the easier classes - like the Necromancer. Much like Diablo 3 - where the Demon Hunter was the easiest through Inferno.

Click to expand...

I don't know about your experiences but I finished alone Hell Act 5 with multiple classes with no trading and very little grinding. And the whole trip from lvl 1 to there was fun and worth taking.

Diablo 3 I finished Normal (after waiting for 2 weeks until they fix their servers) and the game was mind numbing boring and stupid and I quit it.

Later I played after Loot 2.0 and got to finish it on highest difficulty in one play of "story" as I kept bumping up difficulty after each Act as it was too easy all the time.
The game was OK as a casual "spend few hours of completely mindless gameplay" kind of way.

Grim Dawn still makes D3 look like a game for kindergarden.

Archangel said:

I don't know about your experiences but I finished alone Hell Act 5 with multiple classes with no trading and very little grinding. And the whole trip from lvl 1 to there was fun and worth taking.

Diablo 3 I finished Normal (after waiting for 2 weeks until they fix their servers) and the game was mind numbing boring and stupid and I quit it.

Later I played after Loot 2.0 and got to finish it on highest difficulty in one play of "story" as I kept bumping up difficulty after each Act as it was too easy all the time.
The game was OK as a casual "spend few hours of completely mindless gameplay" kind of way.

Grim Dawn still makes D3 look like a game for kindergarden.

Click to expand...

I spent a lot of time grinding specific bosses for certain pieces of loot in Diablo 2 to support my build, to avoid the worst issues in Hell difficulty. I played Paladin the most, and I remember having trouble fighting common mob setups in Hell/Hell - for instance.

AFAIK, Diablo 2 is still relatively active in terms of trading and coming up with optimal character builds, which takes a lot of effort - especially when they involve certain runewords. I clearly remember giving up completely on several runewords, because the drop rates were abysmal (that was fine, though, it was by design) - and I didn't really feel like grinding to be able to trade for them. So, I had to make do with less optimal gear setups, which made for less efficient characters.

As for what you find entertaining, that's very subjective. I'm quite ok with how people like different things for different reasons. Diablo 3 on normal was like playing a small demo segment - and it was indeed very casual. I hope you know that's not really a good way to experience it

As it is today, I'd say the game doesn't start being challenging until you play at Torment 3+ difficulty - though you will eventually find gear that's so good that even that will be quite doable for even casual players. But Torment 6 is probably harder in most cases than Hell Diablo 2 was. That said, the game can be quite challenging on Master or even Expert if you're just starting out with a new character. If you went beyond that without good gear in a recent version, I commend your skill

I think Grim Dawn is a decent enough game, but I'm never excited or particularly engaged when playing it. It feels so run-of-the-mill to me. It feels like a game I've already played years ago.

I had more fun with Titan Quest, personally. Diablo 2 was much better, though.

However, I'll give it more time once the full version is finally out.

Diablo 3 has completely superior moment-to-moment gameplay once you're playing around with full builds - and I love the amount of active skills. Nothing much can compare in that way.

To each his own, though

Reading all those Dart's positive comments about diablo 3 makes me question myself a bit, because he is a hard guy to please. Maybe I was too stubborn to never give a diablo 3 a chance. I just dislike the idea of respecing character. Still the gameplay sounds kind of fun (although somewhat grindy, but thats how diablo 1 and 2 were).

I never planned items for my characters in D2. I planned my skills and went with items that dropped. I never needed to grind for specific items. If certain area was full of enemies immune to my best attacks I skipped them and continued on.

I play all aRPG same way. Only D2 and GD let me have fun that way. PoE is all about item hunting (you cannot even plan skills for your characters as everything is connected with item drops), while D3 is just boring.

I played D3 2.0 on highest difficulty game allowed me. I didn't start from lvl 1 on highest as I didn't know how hard the game would be but I was upping the difficulty fairly fast as soon as I figured out it was too easy. I didn't play expansion for D3, I am not sure if you get all you talked about in vanilla D3.

I don't enjoy D3 trip to unlocking everything, it is very trivial and dumbed down. I got no motivation to get to see everything. I enjoyed D2 and GD from lvl 1 and beyond.

Archangel said:

I never planned items for my characters in D2. I planned my skills and went with items that dropped. I never needed to grind for specific items. If certain area was full of enemies immune to my best attacks I skipped them and continued on.

I play all aRPG same way. Only D2 and GD let me have fun that way. PoE is all about item hunting (you cannot even plan skills for your characters as everything is connected with item drops), while D3 is just boring.

I played D3 2.0 on highest difficulty game allowed me. I didn't start from lvl 1 on highest as I didn't know how hard the game would be but I was upping the difficulty fairly fast as soon as I figured out it was too easy. I didn't play expansion for D3, I am not sure if you get all you talked about in vanilla D3.

I don't enjoy D3 trip to unlocking everything, it is very trivial and dumbed down. I got no motivation to get to see everything. I enjoyed D2 and GD from lvl 1 and beyond.

Click to expand...

As I said, to each his own

Unfortunately, I couldn't just skip the mobs in Hell/Hell - as they were in the way of killing Diablo - and you had to clear areas to open for him. But I guess you found another way, and that's cool.

As for D3 being trivial, I don't find that to be the case with the proper difficulty setting. But the skill system isn't my cup of tea - as I prefer having to plan a strategy, and D3 doesn't give me that option - except in reverse, when you've found enough legendary/set items to support a specific build. But I do love getting so many new toys each level to play around with - and D3 is the best you can get in that way. GD doesn't have a fraction of that, but it does have a less casual initial difficulty level - and I can see why some people would prefer that.

I actually like the way they're handling difficulty levels in D3 now, because I can just pick one that's appropriate - and I'll get more loot and XP if I play on a harder one. The fact that you can play the game in a way that's adjusted to your exact disposition is a real step forward. I never found the Normal - Nightmare - Hell progression to be a smart design decision, as Normal was always too easy - and D1-D3 never got going until the later levels. In fact, I think a lot of people completely dismiss the games because they think they're too easy - because they never bothered to get to the last difficulty level - where the games arguably take their true form.

It's all good, though, you like GD and how it does it - and that's cool

Dez said:

Reading all those Dart's positive comments about diablo 3 makes me question myself a bit, because he is a hard guy to please. Maybe I was too stubborn to never give a diablo 3 a chance. I just dislike the idea of respecing character. Still the gameplay sounds kind of fun (although somewhat grindy, but thats how diablo 1 and 2 were).

Click to expand...

Well, just keep in mind that Diablo 3 didn't "please me" the way I wanted a Diablo 2 sequel to please me. But, after they fixed it up - there's a lot to appreciate about it.

But there's no game out there that feels like a true sequel or proper evolution when it comes to Diablo 2. The closest game is probably PoE - but I have other issues with that one. Hellgate did a lot in terms of itemization and pure visceral combat - but it was never cared for post-release, and the "Global" version isn't what it should be.

D3 is just the "least bad" of these games to me, but we all like different things for different reasons.

Grim Dawn is not even in the same league as far as I'm concerned, but it's not bad. So, that's also worth trying out - if you enjoy the genre. It's obviously made by a small team with fewer resources - but they're making the best of them and the scenery is nice. Combat is so-so - and itemization is on par with TQ - which is to say it's decent, but nothing like D2 or Hellgate - and I'd say D3 legendaries and set items are much more entertaining as well.

DArtagnan said:

As I said, to each his own

Unfortunately, I couldn't just skip the mobs in Hell/Hell - as they were in the way of killing Diablo - and you had to clear areas to open for him. But I guess you found another way, and that's cool.

As for D3 being trivial, I don't find that to be the case with the proper difficulty setting. But the skill system isn't my cup of tea - as I prefer having to plan a strategy, and D3 doesn't give me that option. But I do love getting so many new toys each level to play around with - and D3 is the best you can get in that way. GD doesn't have a fraction of that, but it does have a less casual initial difficulty level - and I can see why some people would prefer that.

It's all good

Click to expand...

Can you explain this part about D3 giving you toys to play with? What do you mean by that? In GD you can tweek the toys you get endlessly and there are a lot of choices.
What I played of D3 loot 2.0 it had none of that so I am confused here. It would make more sense if you said D3 does not have a fraction of what GD offers.

Archangel said:

Can you explain this part about D3 giving you toys to play with? What do you mean by that? In GD you can tweek the toys you get endlessly and there are a lot of choices.
What I played of D3 loot 2.0 it had none of that so I am confused here. It would make more sense if you said D3 does not have a fraction of what GD offers.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about loot, but about skills and runes for skills. D3 has more distinct active skills than any other game in the genre, and GD doesn't have a fraction of that - because it's primarily oriented around passive support for the handful of active skills available to a dual-class.

I actually like active skills much more than loot - because that's what you're playing around with on screen.

As for loot, I haven't really played enough of Grim Dawn to know how much it has there - because later levels might have much more.

I know that Titan Quest couldn't hold a candle to Diablo 2 - because I played it on all the difficulty levels from start to finish.

If GD follows the TQ loot system, then legendary items are primarily about stat boosts and the standard affix/suffix system - just like Diablo 3 was before the 2.0 patch.

After 2.0, Diablo 3 has hundreds of legendary items with game-changing traits - which is MUCH more exciting to me.

But again, you might prefer stat boosts - and that's cool.

Oh, I do like the little gear stuff you can gather in GD (those with 1/3 for each piece) - but I'd have to say the legendary gems in Diablo 3 destroys those in terms of sheer entertainment and game-changing value.

OK, that explains it. Yes, I agree D3 system with runes does give players more options but it does not mean much when you can change it whenever making any choices not really choices.

As for loot, GD currently does not have top level items as those are all higher level. But what it has are items with lots and lots of modifiers and items with passive skills and active skills. Also you can add components to all items and some of these give you more active skills to play around with. Then you got relic items that give you more passive and active skills. And you got the new addition where you can take items and enchant them with more bonuses.

Also you can craft items by finding components and blueprints and some stats of those items are set while others are random. Also GD has set items as well.

Archangel said:

OK, that explains it. Yes, I agree D3 system with runes does give players more options but it does not mean much when you can change it whenever making any choices not really choices.

As for loot, GD currently does not have top level items as those are all higher level. But what it has are items with lots and lots of modifiers and items with passive skills and active skills. Also you can add components to all items and some of these give you more active skills to play around with. Then you got relic items that give you more passive and active skills. And you got the new addition where you can take items and enchant them with more bonuses.

Also you can craft items by finding components and blueprints and some stats of those items are set while others are random. Also GD has set items as well.

Click to expand...

Sounds cool, I'll check it out again upon release

D3 has a lot of crafting stuff too, but it's not really my thing in this genre. I find such things to be too much about busywork - which isn't really appropriate for the genre. But it's nice to have it there for people who care.

joxer said:

I would really like to know why those who did buy it, hated it. Never bought it myself nor would.

Click to expand...

I bought it and played the shit out of it. Leveled every class but Witch Doctor to max level, got paragon level 250 or so.

It's a good game, was always a good game.

My theory is most the noise was made by would-be pirates who were pissed off that the always online means they couldn't ever pirate it. No one in game ever said anything like "wow, this sucks. I'm quitting out."