Support NeoGAF

[Karu]

I knew this would happen from the start, but I still held out... just for living the dream of being there Day One on any console launch ever. But now, now I have finally cancelled my Switch Preorder. My heart is broken.

Waiting for PS5 launch begins. :'-(

(I don't care that buying on launch is generally not that great. I just wanna feel the feeling. That's worth the launch drought, at least once, haha)

 

[UrbanRats]

I knew this would happen from the start, but I still held out... just for living the dream of being there Day One on any console launch ever. But now, now I have finally cancelled my Switch Preorder. My heart is broken.

Waiting for PS5 launch begins. :'-(

(I don't care that buying on launch is generally not that great. I just wanna feel the feeling. That's worth the launch drought, at least once, haha)

That feeling is shit anyway.
No decent games, everything is wonky, nothing works that great, and nobody knows how to fix it yet... and you overpaid for the privilege.

One of the many downsides of Hype culture in favor of consumerism.
You have to make up advantages with "feelings" exactly because you know there aren't any real ones, in buying a console on D1 (unless you have to do coverage for work, ofc.).

The feeling I like, is the one i felt buying the WiiU used for 170€ with some games, a year after it launched.

 

[Visceir]

The concert thingy will be recorded, so whatever ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

Yea, I don't have any qualms with it not being streamed either and like to view it more as a "pretaping of the anniversary show"

I do kinda hope they have the foresight to get some external help with filming the show though as I have little faith in their cinematography abilities. Living in LA I'm sure they have some connections to people who do stuff like that professionally and have the proper camera/equipment for it.

 

[brotkasten]

Yea, I don't have any qualms with it not being streamed either and like to view it more as a "pretaping of the anniversary show"

I do kinda hope they have the foresight to get some external help with filming the show though as I have little faith in their cinematography abilities. Living in LA I'm sure they have some connections to people who do stuff like that professionally and have the proper camera/equipment for it.

That's were I'm at. I understand that they don't have the capability to stream the whole event and while it's disappointing, I can live with that. But the recording better be good, without going out of focus all the time and weird issues with the volume. I'm not expecting some amazing high value production, but it should be better than someone recording a kids play at school with a phone and putting it on YouTube.

 

[Karu]

That feeling is shit anyway.
No decent games, everything is wonky, nothing works that great, and nobody knows how to fix it yet... and you overpaid for the privilege.

One of the many downsides of Hype culture in favor of consumerism.
You have to make up advantages with "feelings" exactly because you know there aren't any real ones, in buying a console on D1 (unless you have to do coverage for work, ofc.).

The feeling I like, is the one i felt buying the WiiU used for 170€ with some games, a year after it launched.

Who cares if you're rich as fuck?

Spoiler

yeah right...

 

[UrbanRats]

Who cares if you're rich as fuck?

Spoiler

yeah right...

Ah, fair enough.

 

[Shadowhelper]

I knew this would happen from the start, but I still held out... just for living the dream of being there Day One on any console launch ever. But now, now I have finally cancelled my Switch Preorder. My heart is broken.

Waiting for PS5 launch begins. :'-(

(I don't care that buying on launch is generally not that great. I just wanna feel the feeling. That's worth the launch drought, at least once, haha)

Where are you reading, seeing this? Is it on the latest Easy Allies Podcast?

 

[LiquidSolid]

Man it's a shame that Damiani is reviewing Zelda. Giving the Zelda review to the biggest Zelda fanboy in the world (probably) is all kinds of problematic. I still remember his Star Fox Zero review and how out of line with the general consensus it was.

I read this post expecting that review to be an outlier but I'm looking at the Metacritic page and WTF are you on about? Damiani's review isn't even in the highest ten scores, let alone "out of line." He liked the game, deal with it.

I knew this would happen from the start, but I still held out... just for living the dream of being there Day One on any console launch ever. But now, now I have finally cancelled my Switch Preorder. My heart is broken.

Waiting for PS5 launch begins. :'-(

(I don't care that buying on launch is generally not that great. I just wanna feel the feeling. That's worth the launch drought, at least once, haha)

Eh, that feeling lasts a week at most, then you're left with a system that won't have a decent library for like a year.

The only way I could maybe justify buying a console at launch is if it has complete backwards compatibility with a system I have a backlog on. That way I have some games to play on it and I can clear some space underneath my TV (instead of, you know, still having my freaking PS3 connected because I still have a big PS3 backlog).

Oh and put me down for not caring that the Anniversary event will be pre-recorded instead of live streamed. I do hope there's another really long live stream at some point too though.

 

[Mista Koo]

Yea, I don't have any qualms with it not being streamed either and like to view it more as a "pretaping of the anniversary show"

I do kinda hope they have the foresight to get some external help with filming the show though as I have little faith in their cinematography abilities. Living in LA I'm sure they have some connections to people who do stuff like that professionally and have the proper camera/equipment for it.

That's were I'm at. I understand that they don't have the capability to stream the whole event and while it's disappointing, I can live with that. But the recording better be good, without going out of focus all the time and weird issues with the volume. I'm not expecting some amazing high value production, but it should be better than someone recording a kids play at school with a phone and putting it on YouTube.

They should get Jon Finger. He did some unnecessarily good shots for Easy Update.

 

[Napalm_Frank]

The fact that Damiani thinks LTTP is a masterpiece makes me worried about the review

 

[Budi]

I read this post expecting that review to be an outlier but I'm looking at the Metacritic page and WTF are you on about? Damiani's review isn't even in the highest ten scores, let alone "out of line." He liked the game, deal with it.

Yup that poster has no logic in his reasoning, he is just being an asshole. Not the first time either when he has a disdain for Damiani, if I remember correctly. If we would look for actual big differences with the average reception. I think their Last Guardian (81 meta / 5 stars) review would top it. And again, that's fine by me. If Blood loved the game more than most, it's still a valid review. The reviews and score are supposed to tell us how the reviewer liked it, not the majority. The score doesn't need to reflect my personal taste either to be a good review.

 

[Maiar_m]

Wait what's that about the Zelda review?! Damiani is so often critical about Nintendo in a close-to-GAF way that this argument makes no sense unless you simply don't like the guy and that's fine but all on you. On one of the few Q&A he got asked why anybody should be excited for BotW being open world and re-hashing stuff seen lots of time in many other games and he gave a grounded explanation that went far beyond typical fanboyism*.

Reviews are not objective robot-powered dissections of media products, they are subjective appreciations of a relative experience. Blood's review of The Last Guardian, though highly positive, convinced me that game was not for me because what he liked about it isn't what I'm looking for in a video game. Same with Ben's FFXV review. That's what reviews (and any editorial piece) are: a window on a specific person's point of view and their explanation of how they got to have that opinion. Huber's RE7 review is a very good exemple of that, he explains what the good is, what he felt was poorly done and why it wasn't enough of a hindrance for him to lessen the game's appeal. I fully trust Damiani's to be along the same lines.

The complaint about him showing some personality and inside jokes in his copy...well. It's a taste issue I guess. I much prefer a writing style that has a unique voice (no offence to Jones) than a dry "when I pushed on the A button it went swish, and then I touched water. 4 stars."

Oh and since I'm ranting in the abyss, I might as well also say that I wished the show wasn't happening on a group stream night so all backers could enjoy the anniversary at the same time whilst the more fortunate ones could get to the concert on the next or previous day. The show being recorded and not streamed is fine by me though. This is all extra regardless.


*Basically that what was interesting was the fact that these were new to Zelda and that though other games have done Zelda-things very well, the dungeon design and general gameplay loop of a Zelda game is still special, and mixing this up with all these new elements makes the new game exciting.

 

[Mario007]

I read this post expecting that review to be an outlier but I'm looking at the Metacritic page and WTF are you on about? Damiani's review isn't even in the highest ten scores, let alone "out of line." He liked the game, deal with it.

To be fair a 4 stars on easy allies is excellent while the game got an "average" metacritic score so it is an outlier.

I'm more worried about the guy's reviewing process in general and in particularly when it comes to Nintendo and Zelda since, after having listened to him on podcasts, seeing his reviews etc he strikes me as someone who has full tunnel vision for Nintendo and that is absolutely fine but I don't actually have much faith in him being able to seperate it from writing a professional review (again when I think professionalism I don't think calling lightining a goddess in a review or his behaviour in the last podcast he was in).

Yup that poster has no logic in his reasoning, he is just being an asshole. Not the first time either when he has a disdain for Damiani, if I remember correctly. If we would look for actual big differences with the average reception. I think their Last Guardian (81 meta / 5 stars) review would top it. And again, that's fine by me. If Blood loved the game more than most, it's still a valid review. The reviews and score are supposed to tell us how the reviewer liked it, not the majority. The score doesn't need to reflect my personal taste either to be a good review.

Man, gotta love that love and respect by calling my an asshole. Especially since you're wrong as I haven't been proclaiming my "disdain" for Damiani. All I've ever mentioned as that having his show as a stretch goal wasn't working and I might have commented here before after the memorable "game of E3 equals best Nintendo game on show" podcast appearance.

 

[Budi]

Man, gotta love that love and respect by calling my an asshole. Especially since you're wrong as I haven't been proclaiming my "disdain" for Damiani. All I've ever mentioned as that having his show as a stretch goal wasn't working and I might have commented here before after the memorable "game of E3 equals best Nintendo game on show" podcast appearance.

Well sorry, I thought you were being quite dickish. But sure, calling you acting like an asshole wasn't nice either. You were very insulting and didn't show any respect to an industry veteran. And your reasoning was false/illogical. Since you don't even seem to see those other reviews of even bigger difference in the same light. So that ticked me off. But I'll try hold such remarks in my belly in the future.

Also you are talking about a guy who gave 7.8 to a Zelda game with 90 metacritic. So please, take a moment to consider what you are saying and check your own biases.

 

[Maiar_m]

To be fair a 4 stars on easy allies is excellent while the game got an "average" metacritic score so it is an outlier.

I'm more worried about the guy's reviewing process in general and in particularly when it comes to Nintendo and Zelda since, after having listened to him on podcasts, seeing his reviews etc he strikes me as someone who has full tunnel vision for Nintendo and that is absolutely fine but I don't actually have much faith in him being able to seperate it from writing a professional review (again when I think professionalism I don't think calling lightining a goddess in a review or his behaviour in the last podcast he was in).



Man, gotta love that love and respect by calling my an asshole. Especially since you're wrong as I haven't been proclaiming my "disdain" for Damiani. All I've ever mentioned as that having his show as a stretch goal wasn't working and I might have commented here before after the memorable "game of E3 equals best Nintendo game on show" podcast appearance.

Him not having the same opinions as you doesn't make him have tunnel vision though. You thinking he's wrong doesn't make him "not objective". The false equivalencies abound with your approach to Damiani's work. You're closer to attacking the man's character than criticizing his work, which can explain why you'd meet some hostility. It's as if you'd rile on Bosman for being hermetic to positive feedback on gatcha mobile games or on Brad or Ian for giving Soulsborn games a golden ticket regardless of anything. The only difference is you might agree with them. Doesn't make them more objective or "professional". These character traits is what makes them work as a crew.

 

[HylianScribe]

I'm wasting a precious few mins now during transferring some files to speak up here, which I really feel I shouldn't need to do but this crap keeps coming up and I'm getting tired of just blatant lies being said. You can give us constructive criticism and feedback all day long, we welcome it. But when you say "I don't trust Damiani with this review", you might as well just come out and say "I don't want Damiani at EZA". That's pretty much what you're saying. And quite frankly, that's the most not-L&R type thing you can say to any of us.

And because of a Star Fox Zero review?

I've been reviewing games for 15 years. I've had some of the best mentors who challenged me to go further and put more thought than ever into my analysis of games. I've been exposed to such a wide variety of games and reviewed them all in as fair of a manner as I can possibly imagine. I don't go nuts at press events, I refuse free shit almost always (the "almost" is only when they want us to have stuff to give away to fans/viewers as giveaway stuff, and even then I usually refuse those items), I don't get overly emotional on the outside in reaction to stuff during conferences because I trained myself to act in a professional manner. I was even worried at GT I was maybe being too generous to games overall one time and did an audit of my scores vs GameRankings/Metacritic averages and found out I am actually one of the harsher reviewers out there.

So when you question my professionalism on a whim and make wild accusations, I expect something better than the selective crap you pulled out of a hat.

 

[Budi]

I'm wasting a precious few mins now during transferring some files to speak up here, which I really feel I shouldn't need to do but this crap keeps coming up and I'm getting tired of just blatant lies being said. You can give us constructive criticism and feedback all day long, we welcome it. But when you say "I don't trust Damiani with this review", you might as well just come out and say "I don't want Damiani at EZA". That's pretty much what you're saying. And quite frankly, that's the most not-L&R type thing you can say to any of us.

And because of a Star Fox Zero review?

I've been reviewing games for 15 years. I've had some of the best mentors who challenged me to go further and put more thought than ever into my analysis of games. I've been exposed to such a wide variety of games and reviewed them all in as fair of a manner as I can possibly imagine. I don't go nuts at press events, I refuse free shit almost always (the "almost" is only when they want us to have stuff to give away to fans/viewers as giveaway stuff, and even then I usually refuse those items), I don't get overly emotional on the outside in reaction to stuff during conferences because I trained myself to act in a professional manner. I was even worried at GT I was maybe being too generous to games overall one time and did an audit of my scores vs GameRankings/Metacritic averages and found out I am actually one of the harsher reviewers out there.

So when you question my professionalism on a whim and make wild accusations, I expect something better than the selective crap you pulled out of a hat.

I understand that comments like those can get under your skin, I'm well aware that Ben and Huber are like that too. But I hope you remember that most of us really appreciate the work you and all of the EZA do. As inviduals and as a group. You are all uniquely talented and knowledgeable. And you are as big and important part of the group as anyone.

 

[Holundrian]

I understand that comments like those can get under your skin, I'm well aware that Ben and Huber are like that too. But I hope you remember that most of us really appreciate the work you and all of the EZA do. As inviduals and as a group. You are all uniquely talented and knowledgeable.

Echoing this because 1 silly comment can easily let people forget the positive ones.
Also as always people getting ultra silly about review scores. It's the clash of numbers being more associated as something used in context for objective truths vs the subjective nature. We'll probably never get people to just understand how subjective judging games is.

 

[wiibomb]

I'm wasting a precious few mins now during transferring some files to speak up here, which I really feel I shouldn't need to do but this crap keeps coming up and I'm getting tired of just blatant lies being said. You can give us constructive criticism and feedback all day long, we welcome it. But when you say "I don't trust Damiani with this review", you might as well just come out and say "I don't want Damiani at EZA". That's pretty much what you're saying. And quite frankly, that's the most not-L&R type thing you can say to any of us.

And because of a Star Fox Zero review?

I've been reviewing games for 15 years. I've had some of the best mentors who challenged me to go further and put more thought than ever into my analysis of games. I've been exposed to such a wide variety of games and reviewed them all in as fair of a manner as I can possibly imagine. I don't go nuts at press events, I refuse free shit almost always (the "almost" is only when they want us to have stuff to give away to fans/viewers as giveaway stuff, and even then I usually refuse those items), I don't get overly emotional on the outside in reaction to stuff during conferences because I trained myself to act in a professional manner. I was even worried at GT I was maybe being too generous to games overall one time and did an audit of my scores vs GameRankings/Metacritic averages and found out I am actually one of the harsher reviewers out there.

So when you question my professionalism on a whim and make wild accusations, I expect something better than the selective crap you pulled out of a hat.

this is something I also found out, you are actually somewhat harsher, which doesn't make you either good or bad, it is part of your objectivity in a review, and that is something I actually appreciate.

also, it should be noted that even with this post, you are not going to stop the vain criticism of some people, that is how internet goes, when you demonstrate some points with someone, 2 more will emerge later who will again spread the same lies, no one can fix that.

Don't let the criticism get under your skin, it is pretty good to learn to accept criticism and try to improve if possible, but it gets bad if the criticism is getting too much in your head, I would be extremely sad if you get out of reviews or EZA, there are some who agree there are some who disagree, that is the way of life.

 

[MrMette]

I'm wasting a precious few mins now during transferring some files to speak up here, which I really feel I shouldn't need to do but this crap keeps coming up and I'm getting tired of just blatant lies being said. You can give us constructive criticism and feedback all day long, we welcome it. But when you say "I don't trust Damiani with this review", you might as well just come out and say "I don't want Damiani at EZA". That's pretty much what you're saying. And quite frankly, that's the most not-L&R type thing you can say to any of us.

And because of a Star Fox Zero review?

I've been reviewing games for 15 years. I've had some of the best mentors who challenged me to go further and put more thought than ever into my analysis of games. I've been exposed to such a wide variety of games and reviewed them all in as fair of a manner as I can possibly imagine. I don't go nuts at press events, I refuse free shit almost always (the "almost" is only when they want us to have stuff to give away to fans/viewers as giveaway stuff, and even then I usually refuse those items), I don't get overly emotional on the outside in reaction to stuff during conferences because I trained myself to act in a professional manner. I was even worried at GT I was maybe being too generous to games overall one time and did an audit of my scores vs GameRankings/Metacritic averages and found out I am actually one of the harsher reviewers out there.

So when you question my professionalism on a whim and make wild accusations, I expect something better than the selective crap you pulled out of a hat.

I would try not to care too much about what some people think/say about this (I understand that that's more easily said then done). I am sure the majority of EZA fans don't feel this way.

Just review your game like you always do and if people don't like it, there are plenty of other reviews out there (Zelda will certainly have a lot of reviews). I don't know a better EZA person to review Zelda to be honest.

Also, it is quite easy to know after some reviews and with the podcasts if you tend to agree or disagree with the tastes of the reviewers at EZA.

I do check who has written the review, just out of curiosity and because I have gotten quite a good idea over time on which Allies tastes fit my tastes more, but apart from that it's not that important to me who has written the review (I mean that as positively as possible) as they are all well written anyway, with clear pros and cons for the reviewer so you can make out for your self if you find those important or not.

Just be yourself. If other people don't like it, they should either not watch it or just deal with it.

 

[Holundrian]

To add although I say games are subjective I also thing there is always valid criticism to be made. I will defend to the death that what happened with diablo 3 reviews almost everywhere was a travesty and there is just no way in hell that people should have ever omitted how utterly broken(like almost all core systems were borked from enemies having impossibly stupid affix combinations, to the loot system, to the stat systems, to character progression, to the auction house) the game was past the first 3 difficulties. That is just not a thing. When you read/watch those reviews you cannot help but get the impression that people basically stopped playing after they reached 60.

Stuff like that I feel like is definitely valid to criticize.

 

[DubyaLucha]

I'm wasting a precious few mins now during transferring some files to speak up here, which I really feel I shouldn't need to do but this crap keeps coming up and I'm getting tired of just blatant lies being said. You can give us constructive criticism and feedback all day long, we welcome it. But when you say "I don't trust Damiani with this review", you might as well just come out and say "I don't want Damiani at EZA". That's pretty much what you're saying. And quite frankly, that's the most not-L&R type thing you can say to any of us.

And because of a Star Fox Zero review?

I've been reviewing games for 15 years. I've had some of the best mentors who challenged me to go further and put more thought than ever into my analysis of games. I've been exposed to such a wide variety of games and reviewed them all in as fair of a manner as I can possibly imagine. I don't go nuts at press events, I refuse free shit almost always (the "almost" is only when they want us to have stuff to give away to fans/viewers as giveaway stuff, and even then I usually refuse those items), I don't get overly emotional on the outside in reaction to stuff during conferences because I trained myself to act in a professional manner. I was even worried at GT I was maybe being too generous to games overall one time and did an audit of my scores vs GameRankings/Metacritic averages and found out I am actually one of the harsher reviewers out there.

So when you question my professionalism on a whim and make wild accusations, I expect something better than the selective crap you pulled out of a hat.

Sadly, this is the way of the world. There will always be someone who doesn't like something, and as such, must make a big stink about it.

Just keep on doing what you do. No need to burn those precious minutes letting these comments get to you.

 

[Budi]

To add although I say games are subjective I also thing there is always valid criticism to be made. I will defend to the death that what happened with diablo 3 reviews was a travesty and there is just no way in hell that people should have ever omitted how utterly broken the game was past the first 3 difficulties.

Pfft, the game got truly fun when the challenge kicked in! But yeah, I don't think most reviewers really dug deep in the end game though. But personally loved the game even at launch. And yes, I have played the earlier ones too.

Oh you edited in auction house, got 250 bucks from it. So no complaints from me

 

[Holundrian]

Pfft, the game got truly fun when the challenge kicked in! But yeah, I don't think most reviewers really dug deep in the end game though. But personally loved the game even at launch. And yes, I have played the earlier ones too.

Oh you edited in auction house, got 250 bucks from it. So no complaints from me

Yeah :-x immortal, fast, walling, and what not champions were such a riot!!!
Also D3 was a really good AH simulator.

Yeah was pretty easy to make money early even high dmg blues sold for good real money that's how stupid the loot was.
But I don't think that a quality indicator.

I hated the endgame. I remember farming that one ghost in act 4 for a high dmg blue weapon.
I still maintain that everything scaling off of your weapon dmg was a terrible design decision and made the game unbelievably boring to theory craft.
As well as the streamlined main stat focused system. I can't speak to how D3 is today but I believe when people say that they fixed a lot of shit that said all I know is that D3 at launch had major issues that I saw no major review outlet mention.(Yes including gametrailers :-x)

Yeah I agree that a review should not gloss over blatant problems with a game, as Ben handled well with FFXV's storytelling IMO. However, there's a difference between objectively reporting that something is broken (ie: servers not operating, massive bugs, unfinished gameplay mechanic,) and being negative about something because it's the consensus (ie: a gameplay loop, a story trope or something). It's for the review's reader/viewer to make up their minds about such things and for the review writer to inform them that such things are in said game. The reviewer's opinion of it is, in the end, only part of what a review is about.

Personally I like a review to first tell me how a game plays and what's the be found in it, what I'm going to spend my time doing, and second to tell me if they thought it was worth it and why, in their subjective opinion. Their bias or my bias then balance out in the end.

Basically yeah that's why I had no issues so far. I personally disagree heavily with the XV review but I understand why Ben liked that game more than me from what he said about it. It's basically just all the subjective things and it boiled down to the sum of its parts coming together better for Ben than for me. Like that I can totally understand. I didn't feel like anything major got omitted or the review was based on him just playing the first half of it.
Same with TLG haven't gotten to that game yet but I also totally get how TLG as a very unique experience within gaming can resonate so strongly because of it despite shortcomings. But dunno maybe I shouldn't speak about TLG since I haven't played it yet.

 

[Maiar_m]

To add although I say games are subjective I also thing there is always valid criticism to be made. I will defend to the death that what happened with diablo 3 reviews was a travesty and there is just no way in hell that people should have ever omitted how utterly broken the game was past the first 3 difficulties.

Yeah I agree that a review should not gloss over blatant problems with a game, as Ben handled well with FFXV's storytelling IMO. However, there's a difference between objectively reporting that something is broken (ie: servers not operating, massive bugs, unfinished gameplay mechanic,) and being negative about something because it's the consensus (ie: a gameplay loop, a story trope or something). It's for the review's reader/viewer to make up their minds about such things and for the review writer to inform them that such things are in said game. The reviewer's opinion of it is, in the end, only part of what a review is about.

Personally I like a review to first tell me how a game plays and what's the be found in it, what I'm going to spend my time doing, and second to tell me if they thought it was worth it and why, in their subjective opinion. Their bias or my bias then balance out in the end.

 

[Blackleg-sanji1]

They should've got Ian to review Horizon,Zelda and the last of us 2

Now that would be a jolly time lol

 

[Budi]

Yeah :-x immortal, fast, walling, and what not champions were such a riot!!!
Also D3 was a really good AH simulator.

Yeah was pretty easy to make money early even high dmg blues sold for good real money that's how stupid the loot was.
But I don't think that a quality indicator.

I hated the endgame. I remember farming that one ghost in act 4 for a high dmg blue weapon.
I still maintain that everything scaling off of your weapon dmg was a terrible design decision and made the game unbelievably boring to theory craft.
As well as the streamlined main stat focused system. I can't speak to how D3 is today but I believe when people say that they fixed a lot of shit that said all I know is that D3 at launch had major issues that saw no major review outlet mention.

Yeah the game is overall much better now, even before ROS launched it was very much improved. But personally I started to lose interest when the game was about farm to farm even faster. Rathen than farm to progress in the difficulties. I didn't see much sense in the farming then. Only leveled Crusader when I bought ROS and dropped the game again. But I got about 600 hours from it overall. The seasons don't interest me either. Hardcore is always fun though.

 

[Holundrian]

Yeah the game is overall much better now, even before ROS launched it was very much improved. But personally I started to lose interest when the game was about farm to farm even faster. Rathen than farm to progress in the difficulties. I didn't see much sense in the farming then. Only leveled Crusader when I bought ROS and dropped the game again. But I got about 600 hours from it overall. The seasons don't interest me either. Hardcore is always fun though.

I see for me Diablo is/was all about build diversity and being creative in how to build your characters. That's basically what I did the most in the D2 theory craft shit and farm the gear to support it and tinker with all the system to min/max stuff. And with that also kind of start a lot of new characters.

In that sense I'm super happy about Nioh :-x which is in some unexpected ways does fulfill that very well + it has unbelievably kickass combat keeping the farming semi interesting. At least I take that over how stupid champions were. Diablo 3 idea about what challenge was I found incredibly laughable. The worst and laziest kind of difficulty design. Something I took even more issue with when I got into Dark Souls shortly after.

 

[Pie and Beans]

I always appreciate that Review Huber and Michael Huber seem like separate people almost. It just goes to show how comfortable the guy is with himself that he can show incredible passion for announcements but still approach reviews critically. Him and Ben seem like great checks and balances to each other.

I definitely appreciate that you know who has reviewed what at the start of video reviews. It's ultimately what cancelled my EDGE subscription back in the day because so many contrarians were hiding behind anonymity. The meta of reviews is always finding people who seem on your wavelength and appreciating their reviews more than others.

 

[diablogod]

Yeah the game is overall much better now, even before ROS launched it was very much improved. But personally I started to lose interest when the game was about farm to farm even faster. Rathen than farm to progress in the difficulties. I didn't see much sense in the farming then. Only leveled Crusader when I bought ROS and dropped the game again. But I got about 600 hours from it overall. The seasons don't interest me either. Hardcore is always fun though.

I got about 500 hours in total between all my characters. Got dull after Reaper came out though and the new design philosophy of the game.

I am super stoked to try out Path of Exile's SIX new acts they are releasing sometime this year. Path of Exile's the true successor to Diablo 2 for better or for worse.

 

[jett]

Yeah, 1 year anniversary, and for 99% of their patrons, nothing is happening.

Kinda weak. Ohh well.

I simply have to agree with this.

 

[Holundrian]

I got about 500 hours in total between all my characters. Got dull after Reaper came out though and the new design philosophy of the game.

I am super stoked to try out Path of Exile's SIX new acts they are releasing sometime this year. Path of Exile's the true successor to Diablo 2 for better or for worse.

Agreed. I would say for a long time if PoE had D3 snappy combat it would be almost perfect. Although currently my new pipe dream would be Nioh 2 going all in on the Diablo aspects and allowing 4 player coop with Monster Hunter style bosses balanced to be challenging vs 4 and even more customization :-x.

Although I also will say that their insane grid node class systems makes it hard to jump in and out of it. I feel like I always need to do 1 hour of research to see where I want to go and what I want to take for any kind of build I want to make.

 

[Napalm_Frank]

I'll accept a 7 hour Frame Trap as an apology for the anniversary shenanigans.

 

[Budi]

I got about 500 hours in total between all my characters. Got dull after Reaper came out though and the new design philosophy of the game.

I am super stoked to try out Path of Exile's SIX new acts they are releasing sometime this year. Path of Exile's the true successor to Diablo 2 for better or for worse.

All three Diablo games are great, but what I really prefer in 3 over 2 is no potion spam and TP abuse. It's cheese. Also the ability to farm anywhere to get best loot. And not just certain boss runs over and over again. Ofcourse dedicated loot table has it's advantages. But I appreciate the variety in enviroment and enemies. I think they've added some dedicated loot after ROS though? Not sure since I haven't played.

Edit: Oh yeah and combat feels so satisfying in 3. Not gonna start to argue what is the best game in the franchise, but I had most "fun" with 3. Ofcourse the first one stills holds a place in my heart for being so unique experience for me at the time. My first or second online game I played besides Tribes. And then came Counter-Strike and ruined it all.

 

[DubyaLucha]

All three Diablo games are great, but what I really prefer in 3 over 2 is no potion spam and TP abuse. It's cheese. Also the ability to farm anywhere to get best loot. And not just certain boss runs over and over again. Ofcourse dedicated loot table has it's advantages. But I appreciate the variety in enviroment and enemies. I think they've added some dedicated loot after ROS though? Not sure since I haven't played.

Edit: Oh yeah and combat feels so satifsying in 3. Not gonna start to argue what is the best game in the franchise, but I had most fun with 3. Ofcourse the first one stills holds a place in my heart for being so unique experience for me at the time. My first or second online game I played besides Tribes. And then came Counter-Strike and ruined it all.

I haven't played a Diablo game in years but I do remember the potion spam fondly. That game was my jam back in the day.

 

[CyReN]

Still catching up, but did EZA get a Switch with all the talks about a Zelda review? or is that for later.

 

[ZeoVGM]

It better fucking not.

I sure hope it does! One of the best 3D Zeldas.

 

[ZeoVGM]

Man it's a shame that Damiani is reviewing Zelda. Giving the Zelda review to the biggest Zelda fanboy in the world (probably) is all kinds of problematic. I still remember his Star Fox Zero review and how out of line with the general consensus it was.

I don't remotely understand the logic behind this. A good reviewer is able to point out flaws in something her or she loves.

I don't want someone who doesn't like Zelda reviewing a Zelda game.

Thank you for writing this, the crooked camera shots in Frame Trap have basically caused me to listen to it as an audio podcast.

I'm honestly having a hard time understanding how you would not physically be able to watch Frame Trap because the camera angle is slightly tilted.

 

[Budi]

I'm honestly having a hard time understanding how you would not physically be able to watch Frame Trap because the camera angle is slightly tilted.

We all have our oddities I guess But yeah not something that bothers me either, or that I have even noticed it.

 

[TheCowboyPoet]

I'm honestly having a hard time understanding how you would not physically be able to watch Frame Trap because the camera angle is slightly tilted.

I'm honestly having a hard time understanding how you would physically be able to watch Frame Trap when the camera is so severely tilted.

 

[AgentChris]

Yeah, 1 year anniversary, and for 99% of their patrons, nothing is happening.

Kinda weak. Ohh well.

Not kinda weak. Complete bs. As a patron I didn't ask for some in concert show that has nothing to do with video games. I hope no money from their from patreon is going to this.

 

[MrMette]

We all have our oddities I guess But yeah not something that bothers me either, or that I have even noticed it.

I have noticed it a few times that the camera wasn't completely level. I understand that some people are more susceptible to stuff like this (I do tend to notice stuff like this as well), but if the content is good (which it is), I don't really care.
It certainly isn't a reason for me to not watch something.

 

[Philippo]

Not kinda weak. Complete bs. As a patron I didn't ask for some in concert show that has nothing to do with video games. I hope no money from their from patreon is going to this.

And i as a patron am completely happy that they're celebrating in whichever way they want, especially if it lets them take out their most creative side (which is one of the reasons EZA is so loved by many), and i'm oka with patreon money being used for this.

Plus, i'm sure video games are going to be a part of it in some form or the other (like always), and they will definitely share some (if not all) of it with those who weren't attending.

 

[TheCowboyPoet]

I have noticed it a few times that the camera wasn't completely level. I understand that some people are more susceptible to stuff like this (I do tend to notice stuff like this as well), but if the content is good (which it is), I don't really care.
It certainly isn't a reason for me to not watch something.

Well I still listen I just open another tab and do some browsing because looking at an unbalanced shot like that drives me nuts.

 

[Kneefoil]

Kinda unrelated to EZA, but I broke 300k in GB Tetris:

 

[SweetJohnnyCage]

Not kinda weak. Complete bs. As a patron I didn't ask for some in concert show that has nothing to do with video games. I hope no money from their from patreon is going to this.

You're right. You didn't ask for an anniversary celebration in your Patreon pledge. Instead, you asked for the tier rewards you selected. Imagine that!

 

[diablogod]

Kinda unrelated to EZA, but I broke 300k in GB Tetris:

Gratz bud, break them walls down.

 

[wiibomb]

Not kinda weak. Complete bs. As a patron I didn't ask for some in concert show that has nothing to do with video games. I hope no money from their from patreon is going to this.

as I have said many times over the course of EZA, being a patron does not entitle you to make the allies do whatever you think because you are giving them money, instead, you are free to not contribute if you don't want to, if you contribute is because you want to support them not because you think you can give them orders.

I'm bummed I won't be seeing anything for the anniv, but I understand if they want to do other plans.

 

[ThanksVision]

Not kinda weak. Complete bs. As a patron I didn't ask for some in concert show that has nothing to do with video games. I hope no money from their from patreon is going to this.

how does it feel to be a tiny little baby

 

[Brian_FETO]

Kinda unrelated to EZA, but I broke 300k in GB Tetris:

Not only broke, but got close to 400k. Congrats! You'll pass Kyle in no time