Print

[Mr.Mag]

what a crap...   cheats will be everywhere so we have to do anticheat once again

[Ajantis]

I'm no haxor, but letting client do server side job is stupid even for me

[Vik]

totally agree, this is what we as runners of a "legit" pvp have been trying to avoid

[FeN]

IIRC they limited pve multiplayer only because game would be too easy with 4+ ppl

i hope the only one reason why blizz limits game to only 4 players is for technical-security reasons. if diablo3 will be typical terminal-game (like web browser games) where all decisions are taken on server, a lot of data have to be transfered. in this situation no "big cheates" would be available. unfortuntely i dont believe in my point of view ;p

On the contrary - they used some new technology, where the client does most serverside stuff - and as we've seen recently - it's very exploitable (for example d3 beta wp exploit)

lol u gonna be kidding me
i hope blizzard made some conclusions from diablo 2 and warcraft 3 (dunno what is going on sc2). if there will be mass cheating like on those two titles i gonna quit pretty soon :-<

[ness]

That 'technology' is about not keeping client synchronized with server all the time, instead client and server are being synchronized only sometimes (like every few seconds). It's designed to help ppl with latency issues because everything/most of things are executed locally and only validated sometimes from server side and it's nothing groundbreaking or so.
Everything that is processed on client is processed on server also but when something is going wrong (state of things on client and server are not matching - game is desynced) server is forcing client to synchronize to his 'version'.
When it happens game skips mobs are teleported around and so on. Like on heavy lag. 
Basically it's about prediction, checking things sometimes instead of generating all data on server and sending it all the time to client.

So I don't think it makes game more likely to be hacked.
It won't (probably) be used in PvP since you can't predict human actions in opposite to AI.

[Amir]

Limit of 4 players per game
PvP arenas and stuff and the fact that there won't be pvp in the first months

[Retard]

If i could name only one thing, 4 ppl per game would be it. I was expecting at least the same number as in d2, 10-12 would be fine, perfect match for a common d2 clan.

I also thought 4 ppl suck. But as much as I would like to see more ppl in the game, with its current gfx it would really be a serious problem. D3 is just way too eye-candy. Implementing 8 or 12 ppl in the game would make it unplayable.

My major issues with D3:
- no stats (well... there are stats, but in fact they do NOTHING)
- no item requirements (only lv req, but no str req, dex req)
- runes available from the start
- no skill levels
- no differences between chars of the same class (if you make 60 lv barb and I make 60lv barb they will both be EXACTLY the same - no different stats/skills)
- no open PvP
- no replays
- no spectators
- no arena editor

I guess I could enumerate way more, but atm only those came to my mind ;P

man, it aint d2 anymore, d3 is a slightly different game, get used to that thought

[Retard]

what a crap...   cheats will be everywhere so we have to do anticheat once again

yep, sheppard's preparing new triggers =]

[zales22]

Yop 4ppl's games are the most f*ckd up thing in new diablo Shuld be more , shuld be really more
Hope in pvp we will have 4v4 ;p
Iam disappointed about bn2.0 too , blizz make something with that! bn1.0 it's really better !! When i play sc2 i feel so lonely

in other things, no so bad changes 4 me - i can live with that

[Morfinista(DM)]

As far as I can see, Diablo III reminds me more of the first Diablo than the second one. To some limits of course.

There's no big issues I have with D3. I don't mind the four player limit. I don't agree with the lack of differentiation between members of the same character class. You still choose only a couple of skills from the ones available, and modify each one with runes, giving you lots of possibilities. Of course, you can argue that some are better than others, but I think it will depend not only on the preferences for PvP and PvE but also on playstyle.

The lack of stat requirements on items is the result of not being able to choose stat leveling (the only way for you to 'modify' your stats is with items), so again, no problem there. As far as the no stat choice on leveling, I don't like it, but I can understand it.

The thing I actually don't like, is no open PvP. I find that a major drawback.
Also, on a minor note, so far I don't like the changes with runes they made in the beta. We'll see how it works out.