Or maybe the internet's just killed my attention span...

Things like that are the reason I like to play the game solo, at least the first time. Everybody plays at their own pace and one of the hazards of joining a public game, in any game, is the idea that not everyone is particularly friendly or empathetic.

My knee-jerk reaction would be to say Blizzard should disable the ability to skip cutscenes while playing on normal in public games, but what about whole group of people who want to move more quickly?

It's a toughie and, unfortunately, it's not the kind of problem I would expect a game like Diablo III to solve.

The last entry in the series came out more than a decade ago. Why doesn't the game do more to indoctrinate newcomers? Or does it not need to?

Before I go on: I know what I'm about to say may be taken as an attack on the game: It isn't.

I'm a lot more aware of how little I'm doing, comparatively speaking, in Diablo III. I'm just clicking stuff. Clicking to pick up items. Clicking to fight enemies. Throw in a few right-clicks and the occasional healing spell (My main character is a Monk) and the armies of hell crumple at my feet.

At first I wanted to blame it on something Blizzard changed - I'm adding stat points, etc - but having played it for awhile now I realized that, realistically, my sense of time and the way I play games is what's changed.

Has anyone else noticed a similar experience? Or maybe the opposite?

Hey everybody, welcome back to the Game Club! We're about to start our second discussion about Diablo III. It's been over a week now, so I imagine that many of you have gone to hell and back and lived to tell the tale. If you've been waiting for a place to tell your tale, you've come to the right place...

On the other hand, it hasn't been that long: If you haven't finished the game yet and you're worried about spoilers you might want to come back after you're done. Then again, based on last week's discussion it doesn't seem like most of you are especially concerned with the game's plot.

Joining the Game Club for the first time? Check out the Game Club's original mission statement. Don't have the time? Here's the quickie version: The Kotaku Game Club exists because no one wants to experience a game alone. Even when we're playing individually, games are always more interesting when we share our thoughts and hear other people's perspectives. The Game Club picks a different game every month or so to play as a group so we can meet to discuss its narrative and mechanical themes and reactions to them.

The Game Club meets on Kotaku every Thursday at 4pm Eastern, and our discussions take place in the comments section of designated Game Club posts like this one.

We're here to hear all kind of ideas, but if you're looking for an idea to get your creative juices flowing, here's a jump-off question for you to answer:

Does designing an RPG to be played multiple times take away from the moment-to-moment experience?

As I mentioned earlier, last week's discussion was peppered with remarks about how the plot of Diablo III isn't a particularly important part of the Diablo experience. That's understandable: Diablo III is a game about loot, customization and, in a weird way, the never-ending pursuit to create the perfect version of ourselves.

But, from what I understand, it's impossible to get about 70 percent of the game's loot on the first playthrough. Again, it's an idea that makes absolute sense when you consider how many players keep beating the game over and over and over again. However, I can't help but feel that there's a backlash to designing the game this way. Beating Diablo III a single time isn't nearly as much of an accomplishment as beating other games because it's not actually the end. In fact, the game never ends: It's an cycle that we can descend deeper and deeper into until either finding loot derives absolutely no satisfaction or until our characters are absolutely the most powerful they can be.

In that way, Diablo III straddles the line between two generations of gaming experiences: The older "high score" mentality where we play games repeatedly for the chance to do better than we did before, and the newer way of "playing through" games, where the goal is to experience a game from start to finish. Diablo, as a series, is a "high score" game trapped in a "playthrough" game's body. If our character's stats are the "score", the way we actually gauge our progress, wouldn't Diablo III be more gratifying if the game was shorter? Short enough that fervent players could complete the cycle, and consequently reassess their their skills, more often?

And that's it, everyone! We're moving on! Thanks for contributing to the Diablo III chapter of the Game Club. We'll let you know the details for our next chapter in a few weeks.

Enjoy!

Personally, I think Diablo would be interesting as a Wii U port. Adding hotkeys and/or being able to switch equipment on the fly are two major problems that the touchscreen controller solves.

On the other, the fact that I can't mix and match from the skill-sets assigned to each button feels like training wheels. I'd like the ability to balance my character myself, but it doesn't like that that's going to happen.

I'm definitely not far enough to make a definitive judgement, but do you guys feel like the new system has changed the way you thinking about leveling up?

Hey Game Clubbers, welcome to our first discussion of Diablo III. I hope that none of you guys had as hard a time as I did logging onto the game for the first time. If you did then, like me, you probably haven't spent as much time with the game as you'd like. Even those of us who haven't been able to play the game every waking hour since Tuesday probably have a lot on their minds, though. I'm guessing that fans who've only played for five minutes will have plenty to say about some of the game's major changes.

As with any story-based game, please note that there may be spoilers in the threads below: If you're concerned with hearing too much about the plot, than please come back at a later time.

If you're a first-timer, you might want to check out the Game Club's original mission statement. Don't have the time? Here's the quickie version: The Kotaku Game Club exists because no one wants to experience a game alone. Even when we're playing individually, games are always more interesting when we share our thoughts and hear other peoples' perspectives. The Game Club picks a different game every month or so to play as group so we can meet to discuss its narrative and mechanical themes and reactions to them.

The Game Club meets on Kotaku every Thursday at 4pm Eastern, and our discussions take place in the comments section of designated Game Club posts like this one.

If you need an idea to help you think about what to talk about, give us your thoughts on the following statement:

Counter to what you might expect, the new character-specific storylines make it harder for players to become attached to their Diablo III characters.

Imagination is a powerful tool in a game like Diablo III. Though the game has a tons history and a story to tie things together, the moment-to-moment experience isn't necessarily driven by plot. So how do we get connected to the game, through our characters: We customize them, level them up and do our best to perfect them because... well, each person has their own motivation. That's the point. This is meant to be our story, and the it's gaps we fill between the details the game provides that binds us to it.

In Diablo and Diablo II, knowing very little about the hero helps you step into the role of Sanctuary's champion. Regardless of your class or equipment, we're ourselves - No matter what the character is named, their identity came straight from the player.

Diablo III moves the series forward by turning each class into a distinct character, giving them a voice and a backstory: The player may give their female wizard a name, but she is who she is, regardless. There's less room for the player to project themselves onto their character.

We're only talking about Diablo III for two weeks, so the next meeting will also be our last! Make sure to come back to Kotaku next Thursday, May 24th, at 4pm Eastern for more Diablo III discussion!

Have fun everybody!

Welcome back to the Kotaku Game Club, everyone. This month we'll be playing Diablo III, because this is one game that a lot of gamers have been waiting a very long time for.

"Expectations" is the name of the game for this month's Game Club. They often play a huge role in defining whether or not we think a game is fantastic, awful, or even worth looking at twice. It's been ten years since Diablo II was first released and even after all that time there are players who keep coming back to it.

A game that's kept people coming back for 10 years? That's a lot of pressure to put on an experience. I can only imagine, but for the series' most zealous fans anything less than perfection could be a disappointment. It doesn't even matter if the game is good or not. Among other things, we'll sort through our nostalgia, expectations, and other emotional baggage that comes with having a longstanding attachment to a franchise.

Are you a Kotaku Game Club first-timer? Wondering why we're here? The Kotaku Game Club exists because no one wants to experience a game alone. Even if we're playing individually, it's always more interesting to share our thoughts and hear other peoples' perspectives. The Game Club picks a different game every month or so to play as group so we can meet to discuss its narrative and mechanical themes, and reactions to them.

Our meetings take place every week on Thursday at 4pm Eastern in the comments section of a special Kotaku Game Club post. Remember that the Game Club is about dialogue as much as anything else, so feel free to speak your mind and discuss other readers' thoughts in addition to your own.

Seeing how we could potentially talk about this games for years to come given the opportunity, we've decided that the Diablo III Game Club will only last two weeks. Hopefully the truncated schedule will force us to be extra observant so that we get a chance to say everything we need to say. Our first meeting will be the Thursday after the game's release, two weeks from today.

Thursday, May 17th - Discussion 1
Thursday, May 24th - Discussion 2

As in the past, there will be a reminder blip on Kotaku each Wednesday to remind you that our meetings are coming up. If there are any emergency changes to the schedule, we'll make sure to let you know.

See you in Sanctuary everyone!

I think that's the idea that sold me on the multiplayer aspect - That are literally thousands of battles throughout the galaxy and you're just jumping into one. I don't think a multiplayer story, which needs to be pretty generic, would captivate me in the same way as the campaign. Since I'm automatically going to compare the two, the idea of including a story that I'm probably going dislike seems like a mistake.

But back to your point, I would've definitely liked to see a connection between my MP players and the "war assets" they represented.

Has anybody else had a particularly good or bad experience with packs?

Welcome to the final Kotaku Game Club meeting on Mass Effect 3. We've spent the last three weeks talking about this game as the culmination of a gameplay promise established years ago, judging the its merits versus the two that came before for it. Today we'll be doing something a little different, venturing into an entirely new area of the Mass Effect universe: "Galaxy at War", the series' first attempt at multiplayer.

If you've never participated in a Game Club meeting before, here's the story. The Kotaku Game Club exists because no one wants to experience a game alone. Even if we're playing individually, it's always more interesting to share our thoughts and hear other peoples' perspectives. The Game Club picks a different game every month to play as group so we can meet to discuss its narrative and mechanical themes and reactions to them.

We meet on Kotaku every Thursday at 4pm Eastern, and our discussions take place in the comments section of designated Game Club posts like this one.

Here's our weekly jump-off question: Does the connection between the Mass Effect 3 campaign and its multiplayer offering strengthen or weaken the experience?

Connecting the multiplayer experience to the campaign, in its way, helps to feel the scale Mass Effect universe and the Reapers' invasion. At the same time, it also personalizes the experience - Where the campaign's war assets are just numbers, you and your squad-mates are real people that you can see and talk to.

Of course, connecting the campaign and multiplayer was also the easiest way to get players to give the untested mode a try: While it could theoretically enhance the experience, it also has the potential to ruin the magic of the intricately-crafted world.

As I mentioned above, Mass Effect is, at its core, a cumulative experience - Our emotional bond with Shepard and his or her crew evolves from witnessing some of their most meaningful life choices for hours on end. "Galaxy at War" introduces a set of non-descript characters are designed to be interchangeable and seemingly infinite in number - When you reach the character's level cap, you can "promote them" and start building a new soldier from scratch. The gameplay may mimic Mass Effect's combat, but players' fundamental motivations - to prestige and buy upgrades - couldn't be further from the spirit of the series.

Then again I enjoyed "Galaxy at War", just not the same way I enjoyed the rest of Mass Effect. It's fun in that same purely mechanical way as many other multiplayer shooters. Truth be told, I enjoyed the game a lot less when I thought that the people I was playing with, who weren't always the most pleasant bunch, might actually fight alongside Shepard and his crew.

Which leaves me wondering: Would the "Galaxy at War" experience been more enjoyable if it had simply relied on the same basic premise of "killing lots of bad guys" that other shooters do instead of trying to coerce us into emotional transference?

That's it, everybody! After today, we're done with Mass Effect 3. Make sure you post your ideas for what we should play next in the thread below. We'll let you know what the next game will be as soon we pick it.

No game can provide a unique ending for every player, but it can produce a unique experience. Every person who has to make that choice rationalizes it differently, and in that moment they're playing the game in way that no one else can. You can replicate someone's Mass Effect playthrough, it's impossible to duplicate the thoughts going through a person's head.

That said, I absolutely agree that the endings should have had more closure.

Welcome back to the Kotaku Game Club's discussion of Mass Effect 3. We're finally here. Today we'll be talking about the game's last missions and its oft-maligned ending. Whether you loved or hated it, everybody seems to have their own idea of what should've happened at the end of this game.

As with all of our campaign discussions, this meeting will be crammed with spoilers. If you haven't seen the ending on your own yet, you might not want to wouldn't scroll down.

Joining the Game Club for the first time? Here's the deal: The Kotaku Game Club exists because no one wants to experience a game alone. Even if we're playing individually, it's always more interesting to share our thoughts and hear other peoples' perspectives. The Game Club picks a different game every month to play as a group so we can meet to discuss its narrative and mechanical themes and reactions to them.

We meet on Kotaku every Thursday at 4pm Eastern, and our discussions take place in the comments section of designated Game Club posts like this one.

By now, the salient details of Mass Effect 3's ending have been discussed to death. So rather than hashing whether or not the ending was good or bad, I have a couple of questions for you about the larger implications that have been brought forth by ending and the controversy surrounding it.

1) Are a "good ending" and a "satisfying ending" the same thing?

2) Do you think the final choice encapsulates the greater themes of the Mass Effect series as a whole?

When I announced that the Game Club would be looking at Mass Effect 3, I said that we wanted to take on an epic game. Needless to say, I think we hit the nail on the head. The last 15-20 minutes of this game raise more questions about Video Game narrative than many games ever do.

The final decision Shepard is forced to make isn't the one most of us expected. It doesn't break things down into paragon and renegade options, and doesn't necessarily let players feel the way they might have wanted to. It is however, and I know I'm skating on thin ice here, evocative. There was no indication of which decision was the best and, as a result, we were forced to think about it.

What did you think about when decided the fate of the galaxy? More importantly, did thinking about it change the way you felt about everything you'd done before?

This will be our last discussion of the Mass Effect 3 campaign, our final discussion will cover the game's new multiplayer offerings. We'll meet back on Kotaku next Thursday, March 29th, at 4pm Eastern.

Image Credit: Hellstern at DeviantArt.

Welcome back to the Kotaku Game Club's discussion of Mass Effect 3. We'll be covering the middle portion of the game's campaign today, picking up where left off last week, after the mission on the Turian Moon of Menae, and looking at everything through the mission on Thessia. It's a lot of material, but some of you thought we weren't covering enough ground last week, so taking a bigger bite this time.

Since we're discussing the campaign again, remember that today's discussion will be full of spoilers. If you haven't been to Thessia yet, I suggest doing so before joining the conversation.

First time participating? Here's the deal: The Kotaku Game Club exists because no one wants to experience a game alone. Even if we're playing individually, it's always more interesting to share our thoughts and hear other peoples' perspectives. The Game Club picks a different game every month to play as group so we can meet to discuss its narrative and mechanical themes and reactions to them.

We meet on Kotaku every Thursday at 4pm Eastern, and our discussions take place in the comments section of designated Game Club posts like this one.

Here's today's jump-off question:

Is deciding the fate of entire species more or less emotional than deciding for your own characters?

Mass Effect 3 is supposed to be about making tough choices: The decisions Shepard makes may very well define the future of every living being in the galaxy. The weight of the world is on his or her shoulders. The question is, are you feeling the pressure, too?

Mass Effect 2 built tension by putting the fate of individuals in your hands. These were characters who you could look at and talk to. Mass Effect 3 asks you to make decisions on behalf of billions, most of whom you'll never see, regardless of whether they live or die. Does widening the scope of Shepard's decisions make them more difficult, or are the consequences so unimaginably large that you emotionally detach yourself from the situation?

Next week we'll be discussing the last leg of Mass Effect 3, including the game's ending. It seems like everybody has opinion about how BioWare closed the Mass Effect saga, so there should be a... let's call it a "lively" event. We'll be meeting here on Kotaku next Thursday, March 22nd, at 4pm Eastern.

Playing Mass Effect as a shooter instead of an RPG, the pauses feel like they get in the way. Using the wheel less helps with that transition.

Outside of the mechanics, I really like the idea of being able to give orders in combat. It makes Shepard seem like much more of a leader to me, which is to say that I feel more powerful and in control.

Welcome to the first Kotaku Game Club discussion of Mass Effect 3. Since I hadn't determined a stopping point ahead of time, we're going to say that today's discussion will cover everything through the mission on Menae. I imagine that some of you are already past that point, but I don't want too many people to get shut out on account of spoilers.

Speaking of which, there will be lots of spoilers during today's discussion, so if you haven't completed the mission on Menae yet, I'd suggest doing so before jumping in. Nobody's going to feel good ruining the game's surprises.

If you're a first-time Game Clubber, you might want to check out our original mission statement. If you're not in the mood, here's the quick version: The Kotaku Game Club exists because no one wants to experience a game alone. Even if we're playing individually, sharing our thoughts and hearing other peoples' perspectives always enhances the experience. The Game Club plays a different game every month as a group so we can meet to discuss its narrative and mechanical themes, and our reactions to them.

We meet on Kotaku every Thursday at 4pm Eastern, and our discussions take place in the comments section of designated Game Club posts like this one. As usual, we'll kick-start the discussion with a question for you guys to think about in case you don't already have an issue you'd like to discuss.

Since the opening of Mass Effect 3 is the culmination of two games worth of decisions, it's entirely possible that first few hours of each of our games were very different. With that in mind, I thought each of you might want to talk about your own Shepard story.

Part of the appeal of communing to talk about Mass Effect is to hear about all the little tweaks and changes that happen from person to person. Think of this as an opportunity to take a trip down somebody else's rabbit hole.

Next week we'll be discussing the next few chapters of the Mass Effect 3 campaign. Let's meet here on Kotaku next Thursday, March 15th, at 4pm Eastern.