PvP is hard, yo


Also, remember when Blizzard shipped completed games, rather than 1/3rd of a game (SC2) or titles missing huge chunks? Ah nostalgia.

About SynCaine

Former hardcore raider turned casual gamer.
This entry was posted in Diablo 3, StarCraft Online, World of Warcraft. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to PvP is hard, yo

  1. Carson says:

    Since getting into the D3 beta couple of months back, I’ve been earnestly telling people how good it’s looking. But with every change and every new announcement, I have to say, it’s looking worse and worse. I’ve gone from “I am buying this on release day, no question about it” to “if GW2 beats this to release, I doubt I’ll bother checking it out until next year.”

    “Sad” was pretty much my response to this latest news, too.

  2. sarevok says:

    “Shut up PvP guy” was said by DIII dev after all, wasn’t it?

  3. Dril says:

    When it’s ready.

  4. red says:

    This is what happens when you move from great programmers to just ok programmers. The quality gap is huge.

    • adam says:

      You really think the programmers are to blame, here? Not more so the designers who make awful decisions and unabashed morons like Bobby Kotick running the show?

      I’ll bet Blizzard still has plenty of very talented programmers seeing as it’s still a top flight destination and they can still pick and choose their guys. That’s kind of the problem, actually. They’ve picked the wrong sorts of people for too long now (and that doesn’t start with the programmers).

    • Sand says:

      No, this is what happens when you move from a company run by gamers to a company run by Kotick.

  5. Jason says:

    Personally, I don’t really care much about PvP getting cut from D3; I didn’t care about it in D2, don’t care about it here. Diablo is a clickstravaganza lootfest, and unless they cut loot, I’m good with it.

    As for SC2, that’s a massive cheapshot, given that SC2 already had more content than the original, which everyone loves to ignore since it’s only one campaign.

    • Mark says:

      I agree to a point, there was plenty of content in sc2 to justify the release. I think most of is are just more annoyed at having to buy 3 games to get the same experience.

      I don’t care about pvp getting cut either really, but it’s just another example of how Blizzard at it’s core has been changing because of activision. At this point they are no longer a studio I trust to get it right just like Bioware is teetering on the edge of this as well.

      I hate it when big studios buy up my favorite “smaller” studios.

    • bonedead says:

      I too played D2 simply for its PvE. For me it was all about loot, money, pskulls, uniques, sets, gotta catch em all!

  6. Professer says:

    Well, after getting in the Path of Exile beta D3 fell off my radar. I’m not too upset.

  7. Sleepysam says:

    I think one of the massively commenters said it best – blizzard is dead. This is vivactiblizz or somesuch.

  8. There was going to be PvP in D3?

  9. xXJayeDuBXx says:

    Diablo III was going to have PVP? Why?

  10. Anonymous says:

    It never even occured to me that D3 would have PvP/ Frankly, I played a lot of D2 and never knew it had PvP.

  11. Wingpie says:

    People don’t play WC3, they play WC3:TFT (better example is SC, but you get the idea). Blizzard has always done these things in a way. Of course SC2 is more of a money grab then anything else, same with Diablo 3 with the auction systems (probably what is holding up the PVP). Even so Blizzard games haven’t lost their overall quality or shine, but they have changed tastes and style; most likely based on the habits of Blizzard employees more then any mythical Activision intervention (don’t doubt that Blizzard still call the shots).

  12. Azuriel says:

    They really can’t win for losing.

    -Release terribly designed game? Fail.
    -Release it when its ready… in August? Fail.
    -Release in April minus the PvP? Fail.

    As for the SC2 thing, was Brood War really all that different? And even if it was, it’s not 1998 anymore.

  13. loller says:

    I’m not sure where people got the idea that Blizzard was bought by Activision, maybe it was because of the name change of Activision? But what happened was that Vivendi bought Activision, so now Vivendi owns both Blizzard and Activision Blizzard but as far as changes go there hasn’t been that many.

    Vivendi have always run Blizzard very strictly and with the single focus of earning them a lot of money, and that hasn’t changed one bit over the years.

    Aside from that people are pretty much whining about the exact same things with Diablo 3 that other people whined about 12 years ago when Diablo 2 was about to release. It’s cute, but for those of us who remember the days when Sierra took all the blame it’s honestly a little silly. :p

    As for completed games? I guess it’s a manner of perspective. They’ve always cut a lot of content from their games to keep schedule. Every software developer does this. The main difference form 1998 and 2012 is that the developers actually tell you about it now because communication is such an important part of how to be a successful game developer.

    • adam says:

      I don’t think it makes much of a difference. They merged and restructuring has and is occurring. I don’t believe for a moment that Blizzard has the same autonomy they once did, no matter what Pearce or Morhaime might say. The proof, for me, is all over the place. D3 PvP isn’t even the best example. WoW’s quality level since 2008 (about when the merger occurred) has been in a tail spin, and I’m fairly sure not all of that can be attributed to the reallocation of resources to “Titan.” Vivendi always ran Blizzard with the goal of earning money, but they always trusted that Blizzard would accomplish that incidentally if they gave them wide latitude to do their own thing. Bobby Kotick is simply not of the same mindset.

      Kotick has a lot of power over Blizzard, directly and indirectly. He’s a brilliant investor and business manager, but the only thing he truly cares about is squeezing every drop of money out of his products and services. He isn’t interested in building or innovating. He isn’t interested in anything that isn’t immediately and significantly profitable. That model works great in a lot of industries, but video games are a highly creative and highly iterative industry and the result of Kotick’s business model will be us, the customers, spending more money for lower quality games. Kotick has already expressed this very wish in about as many words. Vivendi never blithely expressed aloud such sentiments, to my knowledge.

      So, Kotick will continue to appeal to the widest swath of gamers possible (ie, the tourists, as Syncaine has termed them) until that stops working–which it will, given their nature–at which point he will either unload the husk of what’s left or he’ll superficially reinvent the product and start the process over again (see: Tony Hawk series, Guitar Hero series, CoD series).

      Rest assured, he does not have any of our best interests at heart. He has no passion for gaming, no passion for the creative process or the people involved in it. The only passion he has for us, the gamers, comes from the money in our pockets. He’s a cancer in the truest sense of the word and he will do massive damage everywhere he goes. It just won’t be reflected in the market cap.

  14. bonedead says:

    Big whoop, when I think Diablo, PvP is not one of the first 10 things to come to my mind. But as a commenter elsewhere said, if GW2 comes out first, I probably wont see this.

  15. nekomancer says:

    D2 never “properly supported” pvp (you have to create your own rules, code of conduct, and so on, but it was greatly engaging end game. Completely with griefing, ganking and HC baiting :)

    But D3 looks really bad in comparison to D2 nowadays – especially item system – getting perfect pvp gear sets for various builds and strategies was probably the biggest and most expensive (in game currency – SoJs, Ists, HRs) endeavour, and the most rewarding. Actually, Diablo 2 was very similar to EVE Online in this regard (though I think there was probably more gear combinations to try, theorycraft, exploit – but that might be just my opinion, since I don’t know EVE high end pvp). Also HC PVP was very similar to EVE – you have lost everything and have to gather funds to get new ship and fitting (erm, I mean new gear and charms) again :)

  16. Stina says:

    Sad that they had to cut PVP for now… but they probably realized they had to or else they would lose more and more players who have been waiting YEARS for Diablo 3. And they want money.

  17. Bernard says:

    Most people interested in D3 will buy it anyway and use the couple of months to gear up before the PvP patch.

    People who don’t like D3 will become further entrenched in their views and maybe give the game 0 ratings on Amazon or Metacritic if they are so inclined.

    Either way, as soon as the patch drops, we will never, ever hear the end of balance-related QQ.

  18. Tahna Rouspel says:

    At least they won’t charge you separately for the PVP patch like Bioware would. The PVP will be a free patch post launch. We’ll see the rest of the features in the expansion when they’re ready.

    I don’t want to see this game delayed another 4 months just to fix pvp.

  19. Pingback: Diablo III – Hey, This Might Ship on May 15 « The Ancient Gaming Noob

Comments are closed.