The Diablo Formula and how Diablo 3 falls short
#61
(07-24-2012, 12:15 PM)Yricyn Wrote: $60 retail price / 300 hrs play time = $0.20/hr

Twenty cents an hour. How many times did you walk into an arcade in the 80's drop in a single quarter and play for an hour? Even if Diablo 3 doesn't deliver everything one might hope for, its hard to argue that it didn't deliver value. For my own sake, I have less time in total with my purchases of the God of War series and 2 of the Elder Scrolls titles which probably cost me $250.

Wow, I wish I would have gotten 300 hours out of it. I think I was closer to 115-120 - and at least six to ten of that was on the AH, not actually playing. By contrast, in the t weeks or so since I stopped playing, I've got about 50 hours on Torchlight and 121 on Magic: the Gathering - Duels of the Planeswalkers 2013. Note these were effectively $10 each, since TL also secured me TL II. I paid 6.5 times as much with tax for D3, and it bored me in less time than it took me to get bored of -one character- in D2.

I'm still holding out hope that they'll patch this into a much better game than it currently is, but that's entirely a hope and not an expectation.
Finally satisfied that this, in fact, a game in the Diablo series.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: The Diablo Formula and how Diablo 3 falls short - by ViralSpiral - 07-24-2012, 04:55 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)