StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Check out battle.net's front page. It has screens from the upcoming patch. There is a Lilith monster which is a pallette swap of Andariel, and we see Diablo Clone(?) in Tristram. No details at this point.

While I feel like it, I'm going to open up a can of worms here...

Blizzard is adding content, challenge, and fun-factor to a game that is bordering on five years of age. Compare with Dice, who can't be assed to add support for a not-so-ancient line of video cards in a brand new game, an action which would actually get them some more cash. Blizz might get a bit of money from renewed interest, and the usual tards who need to get cd-keys after having their accounts banned, but that's it.

Anyone who screams "two different things" may proceed to shove a hot poker up his vagina. If Blizz can add content, with all the balance tweaking and QA that entails, then Dice can surely dick around with pixel shader code.

I don't see how you can compare a palette tweak with complicated pixel shader code.

SPOOFE wrote:I don't see how you can compare a palette tweak with complicated pixel shader code.

Yes, 1.11 is definately all about that and nothing else

Don't be a twat. Diablo II was old even when Blizz announced work on 1.10.

People (modders especially) have pointed time and time again that introducing support for GF4 cards would be a trivial task.

Yes, 1.11 is definately all about that and nothing else

"There is a Lilith monster which is a pallette swap of Andariel, and we see Diablo Clone(?) in Tristram."

Your words. Who's the twat, again?

SPOOFE wrote:I don't see how you can compare a palette tweak with complicated pixel shader code.

That wasn't all he compared though. Thus, twat.

SPOOFE wrote:

Yes, 1.11 is definately all about that and nothing else

"There is a Lilith monster which is a pallette swap of Andariel, and we see Diablo Clone(?) in Tristram."

Your words. Who's the twat, again?

Not me, since I didn't say that was all the patch was about. Holy fuck, you're desperate to troll this time.

Vid card support wasn't the only thing Dice half-assed; they somehow managed to make a new server browser that was inferior to the BF1942 browser. There's also something painfully wrong when you have to have a dialog come up saying that the menu is loading.

And then there was the whole "oh whoops we released a patch that screwed things up, please reinstall the whole fucking game while we whip our code monkeys into line" fiasco. Shit, it was only just recently that EA was forced to start paying overtime after being sued by their employees. Oh and IIRC they immediately fired the team that was responsible for producing BF2 shortly after release.

Expecting Dice/EA to do something that would require actual, you know... resources is probably a lost cause.

Shit, I was actually getting used to 1.10. Now they're bringing out 1.11? Well, ok. But I hope that my characters aren't fucked up as a result.

Cease the bullshit or the thread gets a trip to another forum I mod.

God, I hope this adds some form of a difficulty filter to Battle.net's game listing. Shit, how was I supposed to know that bailing out of the game while in the Worldstone Chamber was as good as stepping into the portal? Now I;m getting my ass whipped all over the place...

Not me, since I didn't say that was all the patch was about. Holy fuck, you're desperate to troll this time.

Get off the cross, little girl. We could use the wood.

THE POINT, for the cerebrally impaired, is that the tweaks you mentioned in the Diablo II patch are completely different than the sort of work one would need to do to implement complicated shader code. The two are unrelated. Thus, comparing the two is moronic.

Twat.

I just hope necros get to keep their uber-skellies.

~Damienkitty

where can I got to update my Diablo II from version 1.0 to 1.10 or 1.11?

Ok, nevermind I am downloading the v1.10 patch now.

People still play the most over-rated Blizzard game of all time? Wow, the wonders never cease.

Vympel wrote:People still play the most over-rated Blizzard game of all time? Wow, the wonders never cease.

I thought WarCraft III held that dubious honor.

Anyways, it's rather telling when even a gamer with more 'refined' tastes such as myself reinstalled the damn thing a few weeks ago and started playing through again... the game ages well, gotta give it that (thanks in part to Blizzard's almost-unparalleled patch support).

...Hell, don't you play WoW, Vympel? You do realize that's just Diablo Online, Dumbed Down for a Teen Rating and Even Simpler Mechanics?

Some notes on Diablo 2 from our radio show on the weekend:

1) Its not an RPG. There is no role-playing. There is also no game.

2) The story is rubbish. Sure the cutscenes are pretty, but there is NOTHING at all in between them of any real consequence.

3) Diablo 2 is best described as an RTS with a single unit. Not as anything else...

4) It wasn't that good when it came out. Sure it was playable (and everyone on the show played it, some of us played it a lot), but it was NOTHING remarkable and there were SO MANY BETTER GAMES at the time that sadly got no recognition. Because every man and his dog was playing something that was not a game, just a way for physiotherapists to make money out of carpal tunnel and RSI.

Brother-Captain Gaius wrote: ...Hell, don't you play WoW, Vympel? You do realize that's just Diablo Online, Dumbed Down for a Teen Rating and Even Simpler Mechanics?

It's a hell of a lot more enjoyable than Diablo.

DPDarkPrimus wrote:It's a hell of a lot more enjoyable than Diablo.

Out of curiousity, how long have you played WoW?

Brother-Captain Gaius wrote:

DPDarkPrimus wrote:It's a hell of a lot more enjoyable than Diablo.

Out of curiousity, how long have you played WoW?

He's got a lvl 35 Undead Warrior on Azjol-Nerub.

And a lvl 7 Night Elf Rogue on Azjol-Nerub!

The fact that I don't play it super-often helps, I think. I'd just burn out on it otherwise... but it would take me a while, I think.

I'm fairly certain I clocked over 150 hours with Diablo 2, but there is just no comparison with World of Warcraft. If I had an LAN hooked up so my good computer was online, a slightly larger paycheck to cover the monthy fees, and enough self-control to not flunk out of college, I would probably play it more often. (IE: Buy it myself.)

Brother-Captain Gaius wrote: ...Hell, don't you play WoW, Vympel? You do realize that's just Diablo Online, Dumbed Down for a Teen Rating and Even Simpler Mechanics?

Yes, I have a 60 warrior on Blackrock, name of Nevar (I am the only person I know who does not have alternate characters, and never will, for one, because I feel its a colossal waste of time, and two, because I hate all other classes but warriors in every RPG I have ever played). I don't recall Diablo being a particularly "smarter" game or having more complicated mechanics. Diablo is a cookie-cutter compared to WoW.

But yeah actually, Warcraft 3 was way more over-rated than D2. One of War 3's redeeming features though was that it provided a rich world for WoW to take place in.

You haven't played World of Warcraft untill you've played all classes past level 5 and more than four of them past level 10.

Pfft, my highest level character is a level 28 night elf hunter...

Utsanomiko wrote:You haven't played World of Warcraft untill you've played all classes past level 5 and more than four of them past level 10.

Which sadly takes less time then one would imagine. I've done this to test the waters intially.

I say the only thing I like better about WoW at this point then D2....I get to shoot the shit with a couple real life friends and some people I've met there, to do nothing more then kill so poor 62 elite bugger while going "I hate the boss because..."