Right, I guess they do force us to use Adfly. It's not selling if we don't give anything, right? I do believe donations are fully legal in the US because it could be considered a "gift," or something. I think.
But then again, lemonade stands are illegal in the US, so I dunno.
You do realize that almost all mods have a direct link to their mod right below the adfly link? In addition to this, I don't think adfly is illegal in any way. I'm not an expert on the paperwork or anything, but if everyone uses it and I can't find something that says it's illegal, I think it's legal.
I've had this idea for a long time. What if we make minecraft super-realistic? Of course, there would still be zombies and skeletons and such. I'm talking more about the gameplay. I know there are several mods out there that already do this partially, but not to the extent that I would think would be cool.
So basically, these are some changes that would be pretty cool.
-Slower Mining. MUCH slower mining. I guess that we would have to keep it semi-unrealistic in order to make the game playable, but I'm talking a full 10 seconds with an iron pick to break a stone block.
-Mining gives shards of rock. These shards can be crafted into tools and such. Tools would also need string or something.
-Health regenerates much, MUCH slower. Perhaps a heart a day. Maybe something about pain or disabled limbs?
-Crafting takes time. Self exploratory.
-Torches must be lit with flint/steel
-Trees can't be punched. Perhaps sticks could fall from leaves and stone shards from gravel to make an axe?
-It would take a long time to cut a tree down, but it only requires breaking one block.
-Armor slows you down.
-You can hold your breath a lot longer.
-Starvation kills much, much slower.
-You can only carry so much weight at a time. (?)Maybe
-Perhaps somewhat realistic physics?
I think this would be a pretty awesome mod for a server. It would be cool to see how people would survive when the ability to heal and make quick shelter is taken away.
What on Earth would bring you to that conclusion? If you think the previous Diablo game was better, why should you think that isn't relevant?
I think the game should get a lower score. I don't think the game should get a two.
Anyways, people fail to mention the drawbacks of Diablo 2. They compare everything good in 2 to everything bad in 3. I think people just like complaining.
I'm going to take Diablo 3 for this example, but many other games fit the same situation.
Diablo 3 came out. I bought it. I played it a bit. I thought it was fun.
Now other people buy it. They play it. Then they give it a 0 score on metacritic. Wait, what?
Diablo 3 isn't a bad game. No one can possibly say Diablo 3 is a bad game. I'm not going into detail about this. Yes, it has a few problems. From what I can see, people are saying the items aren't interesting and the server issues suck. Okay, that can be fixed with expansion packs and bug fixes. Kinda like diablo 2? I'm not even going to go into the Inferno controversy because the game came out 5 days ago. No one in their right minds would say the impossible difficulty is too impossible 5 days after launch. That's just not right.
It's like people compare a game in a series to the previous game in the series, and if the game somehow fails their expectations based on the previous game 5 days after launch, they give it a very low grade on metacritic. I mean, really? Do these people have no brain? It's totally irrational, and I feel really, really sorry for the blizzard crew right now.
Edit: Alright, I think people are mad because the game changed. But this contradicts so many other things in the gaming world. Wasn't the main complaint about Modern Warfare being that it was the same thing over and over again? It's bad design to copy/paste the old game and add a new engine, items, and story.
I don't understand the problem with unnecessary garbage. Skip it. Personally, I just go along with it. But that's cause I'm me. Everyone has different opinions on what's garbage.
0
0
0
But then again, lemonade stands are illegal in the US, so I dunno.
0
Try deleting Java 6.
Also, this should be in the support forum.
1
0
So basically, these are some changes that would be pretty cool.
-Slower Mining. MUCH slower mining. I guess that we would have to keep it semi-unrealistic in order to make the game playable, but I'm talking a full 10 seconds with an iron pick to break a stone block.
-Mining gives shards of rock. These shards can be crafted into tools and such. Tools would also need string or something.
-Health regenerates much, MUCH slower. Perhaps a heart a day. Maybe something about pain or disabled limbs?
-Crafting takes time. Self exploratory.
-Torches must be lit with flint/steel
-Trees can't be punched. Perhaps sticks could fall from leaves and stone shards from gravel to make an axe?
-It would take a long time to cut a tree down, but it only requires breaking one block.
-Armor slows you down.
-You can hold your breath a lot longer.
-Starvation kills much, much slower.
-You can only carry so much weight at a time. (?)Maybe
-Perhaps somewhat realistic physics?
I think this would be a pretty awesome mod for a server. It would be cool to see how people would survive when the ability to heal and make quick shelter is taken away.
0
0
I think the game should get a lower score. I don't think the game should get a two.
Anyways, people fail to mention the drawbacks of Diablo 2. They compare everything good in 2 to everything bad in 3. I think people just like complaining.
0
Edit: Ok, reviews shouldn't be THAT based on comparison. And every company wants to make money. You can't hate on blizzard for that.
And also: Most people are basing Diablo 3 to Diablo 2 + All the expansion packs. I don't think that's very fair.
And aren't the connection problems fixed now? I don't see many people complaining about that anymore.
0
Diablo 3 came out. I bought it. I played it a bit. I thought it was fun.
Now other people buy it. They play it. Then they give it a 0 score on metacritic. Wait, what?
Diablo 3 isn't a bad game. No one can possibly say Diablo 3 is a bad game. I'm not going into detail about this. Yes, it has a few problems. From what I can see, people are saying the items aren't interesting and the server issues suck. Okay, that can be fixed with expansion packs and bug fixes. Kinda like diablo 2? I'm not even going to go into the Inferno controversy because the game came out 5 days ago. No one in their right minds would say the impossible difficulty is too impossible 5 days after launch. That's just not right.
It's like people compare a game in a series to the previous game in the series, and if the game somehow fails their expectations based on the previous game 5 days after launch, they give it a very low grade on metacritic. I mean, really? Do these people have no brain? It's totally irrational, and I feel really, really sorry for the blizzard crew right now.
Edit: Alright, I think people are mad because the game changed. But this contradicts so many other things in the gaming world. Wasn't the main complaint about Modern Warfare being that it was the same thing over and over again? It's bad design to copy/paste the old game and add a new engine, items, and story.
0
Because no one is allowed to give constructive criticism.
0
0
0
0