![]() ![]() For example, sony prohibited any sales of Everquest items, and they enforced their rule contacting ebay to close any auctions that were selling any everquest items. The worst that could happen is that your access to D2 online is terminated.īut, it is indeed disagreeing with the EULA, and is punishable by bannings. Not illegal at all, in the common sense of the word. Is this really illegal, and if so, why? Is it based on an end user licence agreement, and if so is there any legal concensus on how enforceable it might be? Certain "unique" items can sell on Ebay for upwards of $500USD(which mind you, is illegal). Interestingly, this trading occurs in-game, and in the real world. Barring a revert or vandalism, they should be a lot better now. A person who knows nothing about D2 was forced to read rather technical D2 stuff to find out what a Sorceress was. Like it is not, you can read what a Barb IS, and skip the Pro's and Cons. (Game developers and Blizzard themselves can use it, which is the point of an encyclopedia.) I think in all cases the structure of any article should allow any reader to skip the parts he isn't interested in. I agree that the evolution of the game should be captured, since it is valueble information. It's not perfect, but it's a LOT better than it was at the beginning. I like the structure a lot more like it is now. FYI, I personally consider Shockwave to be the most overpowered skill in the game. This is supposed to be a historical article, not Laz's Opinion of Diablo 2. Therefore, the "pros & cons" are the "voice of ", not my "personal opinion". ![]() The overwhelming consensus in 1.09 was that druids were "useless", so nobody made a druid and those who did fully expected their character to be "useless", which of course made them seem more useless than they really were, which in turn reinforced the stigma. The way it works is that when a new patch was released or a new discovery made, as soon as the pioneers decided that build x was "overpowered" and build y was "useless", other people who hadn't even tried them parroted the pioneers' opinions and they became an objective reality. The evolution of is a piece of Blizzard history that should be preserved, while strategy guides only last as long as the actual game and become useless Artagas: those build evaluations are in fact cold hard facts. I believe it would be far more interesting five years from now to know how the classes evolved over time. A strategy guide would be "to build a javazon, invest 7 points into pierce, max lightning fury, get a physical damage merc for lightning immunes forget about magic and rare javelins, Titan's Revenge is far superior there is some dispute about the ideal Valkyrie skill level.". When I rewrote those sections a while ago, I tried to portray the evolution of the character builds over time, not how to build them. The "pros & cons" are not strategy guides. This article is clean for now.- TheAznSensation 2 July 2005 01:30 (UTC) I would consider things such as "how to beat" or "where to find" to be more strategy. Describing the pros and cons of the different characters is information which allows the reader to interpret the information on his/her own. While it is true that this is an encyclopedic article and not a strategy guide, I do feel that much of the information on this page is encyclopedic. Often used for Magic Finding.") would be appropriate, along with the explanation of other common game terms, but the builds' strengths and weaknesses should not be discussed here. The rest of the points are typically spent on the appropriate synergies and masteries along with teleport and static charge. ![]() I think a list of common builds, with a very brief description of what they are (example: "Meteorb sorceress: A sorceress mainly relying on the meteor, frozen orb and fireball spells. I think the main issue is that character build evaluations are a rather subjective topic (since it is often based on an individual's gaming experience rather than some hard cold facts) and as such doesn't really have a place in an encyclopedia. The ideal would be to create a "Diablo 2 Strategies" section or page, and move everything to that section/page. If strategies have to be present, we should at least get some standardised structure to place it in, otherwise it becomes messy. This is not a strategy guide, it should give information about the game, not neccesarily how it should be played. Even though strategies used in a game does play an important role, I don't think that the strategies should be on this page. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |