Blizzard's comeback, D4 scoring high.

"

pr13st wrote:

Same here, not paying them 70 euro out of principle, maybe in 2-3 years.

Surprised at the high marks overall, but the reviews were made for the campaign, polish and graphics, not the endgame and itemization which is by far the most interesting aspect for me. Also I wonder how many of those were paid reviews.

The casuals will FLOCK to it tho, curious on ggg's move now.

Most of the reviews I saw spent plenty of time in the endgame. If anything they downplayed the campaign but most intimated it serves as an introduction rather than a full story. The endgame, in contrast, appears to have been deployed in a relatively robust manner. Blizzard gave reviewers ten days of full access -- they clearly wanted people to do more than just go through the story and score the game just on that. That said we have to go by Blizzard's definition of endgame, not GGG's -- which means a character in their 50s can be doing DIV's endgame (consensus is story takes you to about 45-50 and anything past that is functionally 'endgame'). So no, the reviews aren't ignoring the endgame at all. Exiles are ignoring that reviews do talk about the endgame, though. That much is true. Might be a good idea to stop doing that, even if it forces them to change their minds. It won't hurt. Promise. PoE doesn't have to be the only ARPG with a strong endgame, even if arguably that's all it has.

As for paid reviews, meh. All of them get something out of it, but there are too mamy good ones for it to be some sort of gaslighting operation. Occam's razor is never not your friend. I don't imagine some small time press or streamer putting their rep on the line to shill a blatant failure in the form of a glowing review. They get their cash from shilling outside the review space, not within it. This insight was brought to you by Raid Shadow Legends.

and if somebody doesn't praise it, it becomes bad ? or do you just straight up ignore and invalidate those ppl ?

you ppl are not about games, but about throwing around money and attention

depends if we go by the standard definition of game,
which usually represents a quick daily 30minute interaction with intuitive interface and plenty of random interaction events.
or on the other workethics which require a monotonous task to be repeated straight slaved 7hours away, which arpgs usually tends to fall into.
And yes theres a market for both.

When it comes to early beta reports, they are usually as much worth as the plushie the reporting individual received, therefore easily skipable until further notice upon the first paid obligatory dlc.

I´m currently more surprised about AoW4 being surprised of falling into the first category upon release, with a clear endgame outline of what they want to implement during the next year.

Super excited that the endgame ended up being good. Looks like Blizzard has a winner but they're going to have to deliver solid content quarter after quarter. Dunno if they're ready for that.

hoho curious to see how this goes in the coming months.

"

DiabloImmoral wrote:

Super excited that the endgame ended up being good. Looks like Blizzard has a winner but they're going to have to deliver solid content quarter after quarter. Dunno if they're ready for that.

I think the initial plans for year 1 and 2 are solid for sure. I dont anticipate that being an issue.

The curiosity for me lies in the larger expansions, additional classes, runewords, and set items.

Is Paladin, Monk, or Crusader coming next Summer for example? Or maybe a new Death Knight class if some speculation pans out? If they plan on doing something like that annually, that's a huge revenue driver.

Diablo 4 actually got a 7/10 score here in the main gaming outlet, which was surprising as the review itself was fairly glowing from a longtime fan.

In any case, I wouldn't put much value on official and thus largely paid-for-reviews. We know how that process works. It's not independent or objective.

That said, I of course expect the game to be good, but way overpriced, and would like to play it once the price is slashed in half in a year or two. By then bugs should be fixed as well, and we know the answer to the question about how severe the monetisation issue will be handled by the big suits at Microsoft-Activision-Blizzard. Totally absurd to me that the takeover was approved by most bodies, as it will obviously be very bad for competition and thus for consumers. But this is the world we live in. Those concerns are marginal at best.

Surprised anyone trusts anything said on the internet. Ill reserve judgement till after I see gameplay vids with all types of endgame. Let the rich and naive satisfy their hedonism, my money will be well spent.
Before any nitpicks, full runs not 1min bullvids.

It's the kind of comeback you expect when there's more weight to the disappointment.