Diablo III is getting killed on Metacritic

this definitely needed it's own topic


I'll repost what I said in the other thread cause I feel like you don't understand or you're trolling because this didn't need to be reposted or need its own thread.



metacritic accounts for less than a percent of the people who bought diablo 3. That means that its user ratings reflect .03% of the diablo 3 community. worthless
 
Meh, bunch of kids crying because of server issues. While they shouldn't get a free pass, the game itself has been a hell of a lot of fun.
 
Probably would have been a good idea not to require an Internet connection to play SP then huh?
 
Probably would have been a good idea not to require an Internet connection to play SP then huh?

naw I have bomb internet and I dont like cheaters so I think im good with it the way it is
 
naw I have bomb internet and I dont like cheaters so I think im good with it the way it is

So what you're saying is that you cannot control yourself when it comes to cheats so you play online so you cannot cheat? And you could have the best internet in the world and still not connect to the servers right now.

Fanboy.
 
Kind of shows why metacritic is so irrelevant.

All of the "professional" reviews are paid for, all of the user reviews are political.
 
So what you're saying is that you cannot control yourself when it comes to cheats so you play online so you cannot cheat? And you could have the best internet in the world and still not connect to the servers right now.

Fanboy.

I never said I cheat at all. The purpose of online only is too insure the integrity of the game. There was lots of duping and cheating in Diablo 2 and it's an intelligent move in order to make sure everything in the game is legit. It's also a smart way to prevent pirating.

I don't mind being called a fanboy I love diablo3 :)
 
my internet is too pro it connects to blizzard when you cant; whyre you trolling so hard hahahah




how do you think duping came about

I don't know what that means as I don't play the game but your telling me they can't find a way to let players play offline without people being able to cheat?????

Simple, create an offline local mode only character and an online one. Or is it?
 
I never said I cheat at all. The purpose of online only is too insure the integrity of the game. There was lots of duping and cheating in Diablo 2 and it's an intelligent move in order to make sure everything in the game is legit. It's also a smart way to prevent pirating.

I don't mind being called a fanboy I love diablo3 :)

This has been discussed to death and it's total bullshit to say that this is the only way to defend against cheating. You know another way they could defend against cheating without actually fucking over their fans? Make the single and multiplayer totally separate. Hey that's not so hard is it? Also BS on the piracy thing. SC2 was pirated not long after it released, D23 is going to be the same way. It does fuck all to prevent piracy. You know the real reason Blizzard did it? The real-money auction house. If they actually made it so people that only cared about SP never went online then they couldn't use the RMAH. It has nothing to do with piracy or cheating.
 
Metacritic gets bombed every time a giant release is somewhat dissapointing to the general populace. I have a few legit complaints about the game, but no way I would give it less than 7.5/10 at this point. They made some dumb design choices, but the game is actually fairly fun.
 
What? They are doing the same BS as Ubisoft?

Well, it's not so much as "always online DRM" as, everything is stored server-side so you can't play unless you are connected to their servers.

The effect is the same, though.

And if you guys actually read some of the Metacritic scores, a lot of them fault the game for being too simplistic compared to Diablo 2. Many of them don't say anything about server issues.

Not to mention several of the 10 ratings just say "lol trolls" and nothing about the actual game. So you've got people who are trolling on both sides.
 
Damn, getting beat up pretty bad on the online DRM bullshit. Most of it is just people that are pissed off they couldn't get in right at 12:00. The reviews are the same on Amazon too, just a lot of people blowing off steam. However, quite a few people are pissed about the same things I am; no stat/skill allocation, etc,etc...it's been discussed to death. It makes me wonder how many of those people actually bought the game though, since we all knew this stuff ahead of time, and you shouldn't have bought it if you don't like it. That's why I didn't buy it.
 
Last edited:
this definitely needed it's own topic


I'll repost what I said in the other thread cause I feel like you don't understand or you're trolling because this didn't need to be reposted or need its own thread.



metacritic accounts for less than a percent of the people who bought diablo 3. That means that its user ratings reflect .03% of the diablo 3 community. worthless

By that logic, all reviews are worthless. :rolleyes:
 
By that logic, all reviews are worthless. :rolleyes:

It's exactly that.. logic :p.

however if you value the opinion of metacritics user reviews then to each his own my friend. Because you're right by that logic all reviews are worthless; Some reviewers you may like for instance I like IGN reviews I value their opinion especially the playstation teams opinion I find them to be honest; however if you're like me and think of most of these user reviews as untrustworthy and valueless than that is pretty much the definition of worthless isn't it..
 
In some ways I would trust a compilation of user reviews over "professional" ones just because you never know when those "professional" sites are getting paid for review scores.

Of course, there is also instances like this where a game has a bad launch and it puts people off, too.
 
I wont be able to install and play for another 4+ hours but I"m hoping I can by then.
 
Save your time and ignore any review with a 0/1 or 9/10 score, because it's neither. It's like a battle of the haters/fanboys over there. If you look at the 4-8 scores, you can get a pretty fair idea of what people really think about the game instead of the "Grrr! I can't login, this is crap!" and "OMG it's the bestest thing evarrrrr, stop being mean to my girlfriend!" reviews.
 
In some ways I would trust a compilation of user reviews over "professional" ones just because you never know when those "professional" sites are getting paid for review scores.

Of course, there is also instances like this where a game has a bad launch and it puts people off, too.

Is there any proof at all that professional review sites are paid by associated with game companies? at all?
 
Google 'Jeff Gerstmann'.

That wasn't a case of anyone being paid off it was a case of the management of Gamespot at the time not understanding the way things work and refusing to stand up for their employees. No one was paid off to do anything.
 
Meh, bunch of kids crying because of server issues. While they shouldn't get a free pass, the game itself has been a hell of a lot of fun.

There have been other fun games that have received similar scores for issues similar, if not lesser than this. Just imagine if it was EA which created Diablo 3, all else being equal.

Unfortunately, another area where it really hurt was that it was called Diablo. Would the scores be better if it was treated as a new franchise? Probably. It's similar in my opinion to a game like Ultima 8, or even Deus Ex: Invisible War. Neither of these was near as horrible as the communities made them out to be, if taken as an individual work, but the fact that both of them followed a beloved game, made it so that practically nothing these sequels did could possibly live up to the expectations of the community. Excluding server and DRM issues (which are a negative imho), the games do get judged against the prequels.

*EDIT*

Save your time and ignore any review with a 0/1 or 9/10 score, because it's neither. It's like a battle of the haters/fanboys over there. If you look at the 4-8 scores, you can get a pretty fair idea of what people really think about the game instead of the "Grrr! I can't login, this is crap!" and "OMG it's the bestest thing evarrrrr, stop being mean to my girlfriend!" reviews.

Probably this is the best advice. I'd say 10/10 though, and not 9/10.
 
Google 'Jeff Gerstmann'. That will give you a gist of how it often works behind the curtains.


damn thats super shady though... I could see why some people would be suspicious because there is an exchange of funds for advertisements on their websites but I think it might be a little much to say that effects their reviews.. maybe Im being naive
 
That wasn't a case of anyone being paid off it was a case of the management of Gamespot at the time not understanding the way things work and refusing to stand up for their employees. No one was paid off to do anything.
Wait what? Not to derail the thread but Gamespot was receiving a lot of advertising money at the time and was expected by Eidios to publish a positive review of their game. Gerstmann supposedly refused to comply. Based on what was reported, they were effectively being paid off. In any case, the matter was/is enough to be suspicious and to take professional reviews with a grain of salt.
 
Last edited:
Just ignore all the reviews saying it's "too simplistic" and "not really Diablo", because it's obvious they haven't played the game.

The only difference between D3 and D2, gameplay-wise, is the way you assign skills. Hell, there's even more customization in D3 just based on the fact that every skill remains relevant throughout the game.
 
Just ignore all the reviews saying it's "too simplistic" and "not really Diablo", because it's obvious they haven't played the game.

The only difference between D3 and D2, gameplay-wise, is the way you assign skills. Hell, there's even more customization in D3 just based on the fact that every skill remains relevant throughout the game.

yeah this point just does not translate well for people even though its the truth. They swear by D2 customization but really its not existent.
 
1) Always on DRM. (Funny how ubisoft is the devil for this (they are) yet Blizzard gets a free pass.
2) Out-dated graphics. This game should of been released 5 years ago.
3) Simplistic game play.

I get the feeling the only people who are defending this POS game by this POS developer are people who miss the days when Blizzard was a company that cared about quality and game play.
The Metacritic scores are probably pretty accurate for D3.
 
Wait what? Not to derail the thread but Gamespot was receiving a lot of advertising money at the time and was expected by Eidios to publish a positive review of their game. Gerstmann supposedly refused to comply. Based on what was reported, they were effectively being paid off. In any case, the matter was/is enough to be suspicious and to take professional reviews with a grain of salt.

Gertsman went into full detail about the situation after Giant Bomb was bought. There are a lot of assumptions people made that weren't entirely true and some that were. It's worth checking out since he was finally given permission to talk about it.
 
Just ignore all the reviews saying it's "too simplistic" and "not really Diablo", because it's obvious they haven't played the game.

The only difference between D3 and D2, gameplay-wise, is the way you assign skills. Hell, there's even more customization in D3 just based on the fact that every skill remains relevant throughout the game.

Based on the beta it doesn't feel that much like Diablo 2. Before you say it's not fair to jugde it based on the beta, yes it is perfectly fair. Blizzard opened the beta up to everyone for to play for a weekend. It is a perfectly valid thing to judge it based on. It feels like a Diablo designed for the possibility of being ported to consoles. Now I'm not say what they did was bad, I had some fun, but the beta did nothing to make me really want to buy the game. I'm not looking for a streamlined Diablo-lite experience there are plenty of those around if I want one.
 
It's simple folks, you don't like it, don't buy it. Please though, the whining has got to stop. Most people hating on the game did not participate in the beta and have no idea what they are talking about but are simply jumping on a hate bandwagon. No one cares about metacrtic and no one cares that mommy won't give you the money to buy the game.
 
Based on the beta it doesn't feel that much like Diablo 2. Before you say it's not fair to jugde it based on the beta, yes it is perfectly fair. Blizzard opened the beta up to everyone for to play for a weekend. It is a perfectly valid thing to judge it based on. It feels like a Diablo designed for the possibility of being ported to consoles. Now I'm not say what they did was bad, I had some fun, but the beta did nothing to make me really want to buy the game. I'm not looking for a streamlined Diablo-lite experience there are plenty of those around if I want one.

the beta is not a good way to base an opinion off of. Not only is it a much older build then retail but its the least entertaining part of the game. they opened up the beta to stress test the servers not for you to get a taste, and you got that particular section of the game because its the only part of the game without spoilers.
 
Back
Top