Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Diablo III coming May 15

us.battle.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 125 posts

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#91

Post by maqr »

MartinCron wrote: post #88
fbuilesv wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Mac support has always been great for Blizzard games and D3 is no exception. I've been playing the beta in a 2009 MBP for a couple of weeks now and everything looks pretty smooth. Unlike companies like EA, Blizzard spends real time making sure their Mac offerings are as good as the Windows ones and that is enough for myself to be a supporter.

I've been playing the beta in a 2009 MBP for a couple of weeks now and everything looks pretty smooth. Question about heat: My wife's MBP (2011) runs what seems to be dangerously hot doing even basic web video and she's worried that D3 will melt it entirely.

It can't. All modern chips have thermal protection. It'll just throttle down if it gets too hot.

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#92

Post by vectorpush »

cowkingdeluxe wrote: post #81
forrestthewoods wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I strongly support this model. Supporting both Blizzard hosted servers and a local server for offline play is a huge amount of work for a teeny tiny percentage of the population. I'd much rather those resources be invested in something more worthy. It sucks because Diablo 1 and 2 supported local play but if Diablo 3 were the first in the series I don't think anyone would be complaining.

LAN is what made Diablo 1 and 2 great, not the "battle.net". This is a step down in features for the consumer (just like the step down in features for Starcraft 2 from 1). There's no reason to paint a rosy picture about it. Last I checked there were still more active custom Warcraft 3 games than SC2 games and that speaks volumes. You honestly think they said "hmm, let's save money by requiring online to play so we ca…

LAN is what made Diablo 1 and 2 great, not the "battle.net".

I have to disagree. Diablo 2's robust player economy was the driving force behind the game's lasting success (hence the advent of cash auctions in Diablo 3).

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#93

Post by Fargren »

mihaifm wrote: post #45
zmj wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am interested to see how the real-money auction house works out. Somebody's going to be making some money off that.

Just hope it's not overrun by bots, as D2 is right now.

What's the problem with bots? Don't they make the market more liquid?

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#94

Post by watty »

politician wrote: post #50
zmj wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am interested to see how the real-money auction house works out. Somebody's going to be making some money off that.

Spoiler: That somebody is Blizzard.

That's a given, will be more interesting to see how individuals make large amounts of cash.

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#95

Post by pablasso »

xenophanes wrote: post #61
vyrotek wrote: post #27

While I'm very (very) excited for this game.. I'm very nervous about my productivity this summer. There are few things that can pull me away from coding. This is one of them. Maybe D3 will open some new startup opportunities? Yes.. yes that's what I'll tell myself. It's all research.

You could sell a game guide for D3, however Blizzard legal hates those. They've done stuff like file takedown notices with ebay, over and over. Then when the guy filed a counter notice, they refused to go to court, waited for the time period to expire, then started filing more takedowns for his new game guide auctions. This disgusting behavior got his ebay account suspended! And they refused to ever explain specifica…

Short version: You could do this, but don't because you really can't.

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#96

Post by dev_jim »

simonsarris wrote: post #68
thetron wrote: post #12

I am super excited for this, but a little disappointed that Blizzard apparently doesn't understand exchange rates. The Australian dollar is currently worth (marginally) more than the US Dollar, and yet the game costs an extra $20 here. I don't understand how this is justifiable.

I'm not sure if you're having a rhetorical meow or just want to know what's going on here, so I'll offer an explanation. It's not about exchange rates and never ever will be. It's about purchasing power. It's just normal market segmentation, like how textbooks are cheaper in India/China than in the U.S. Whats the average purchasing power of an Australain versus an American? The Australian dollar is worth more than th…

> It's not about exchange rates and never ever will be. It's about purchasing power. It's just normal market segmentation, like how textbooks are cheaper in India/China than in the U.S.

A blanket statement like this is not correct. iPhones aren't cheaper in China. Louis Vuitton purses aren't cheaper in China.

Prices are what the market will bear in that country. $60 is what video games cost in America. More than that and Blizzard would see a dent in their sales that likely would not make up for any increase in price. Similarly, Blizzard probably isn't charging more (or much more) for Diablo in Australia because all other video games are that price.

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#97

Post by politician »

watty wrote: post #94
politician wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoiler: That somebody is Blizzard.

That's a given, will be more interesting to see how individuals make large amounts of cash.

Do you really think that individuals will be able to make any money with this system? Farming versus INSERT INTO Loot (...) doesn't seem like a fair fight.

I suspect that you'll have Blizzard not only taxing transactions, but being the counter-party in many of them anyway. If they can control the drop rate for farmers (and hence the perceived value), yet can materialize items at will what's to stop them from turning it into an infinite money machine?

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#98

Post by qdog »

rkalla wrote: post #87
qdog wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lost a couple years of life to playing MUDs a while back. Still occasionally log on, the ability to type commands makes it much easier to have a complex game and environment, but not so much with the pretty pictures. Luckily, I've sworn off Blizzard since they sued the bnetd guys, so D3 isn't a concern for me.

Swearing off Blizz won't save you; it'll just be Valve then or EA or Mojang or Zynga... they'll get you eventually :)

I play minecraft with my son, who's 10, but it doesn't appeal to me that greatly beyond playing with him. Dwarf Fortress and Crawl, on the other hand, can end up sucking hours of my day if I'm not careful.

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#99

Post by MartinCron »

sbmassey wrote: post #74

Unless they have some new control scheme, I don't think my hands will stand up to the intense mouse clicking this game needs.

I found that with Diablo II, you could click a lot less than was intuitive. Click-and-hold would be as effective as click mashing, and a lot easier on the hands.

Re: Diablo III coming May 15

#100

Post by forrestthewoods »

cowkingdeluxe wrote: post #81
forrestthewoods wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I strongly support this model. Supporting both Blizzard hosted servers and a local server for offline play is a huge amount of work for a teeny tiny percentage of the population. I'd much rather those resources be invested in something more worthy. It sucks because Diablo 1 and 2 supported local play but if Diablo 3 were the first in the series I don't think anyone would be complaining.

LAN is what made Diablo 1 and 2 great, not the "battle.net". This is a step down in features for the consumer (just like the step down in features for Starcraft 2 from 1). There's no reason to paint a rosy picture about it. Last I checked there were still more active custom Warcraft 3 games than SC2 games and that speaks volumes. You honestly think they said "hmm, let's save money by requiring online to play so we ca…

Yeah I'm gonna have to disagree with that. Diablo 2 had a gigantic thriving online community. The game is all about loot and trading is a key component to that. I don't doubt that you personally had an enjoyable LAN experience with Diablo 2 but I'm fairly certain that far more users played online multiplayer than LAN multiplayer. The percentage of users who have a LAN but not internet access is inconsequential.
Post reply on HN