Man, this is disappointing. So the only time I will see/use a follower is in my first/only solo play through of the game? And only really effective in normal? Thank you blizzard!.. may I have another!?
I am trying to accept why they aren't allowed in multiplayer, too much clutter, and them talking all at once or whatever blah blah blah.
But I think it's stupid to have their effectiveness in difficulties go from, "Cool and awesome sauce" to "Gimp handicap fool" to "Useless decaying OD'in bum" (Also no offense to anyone who may be handicap)
I was like super excited when I first saw the trailer, and now it feels like Blizzard returned my Christmas presents right in front of my damn face.
The fact of the matter is none of us have played the game as it currently is, and as a result we can't put into perspective what they mean by too much clutter. That being said, it isn't hard to believe that having 4 players with 4 followers is a bit much.
Yeah, they could have the best of both worlds if they did that. Surely the MF & GF skills aren't essential to making them good for new players in normal difficulty. I like how they wont be used on co-op but I dont see why they feel they have to make them crap in the late game on to make them useful early on? its not binary..
Well at least in the case of the Scoundrel theres really no use for him if you're a DH except for the MF/GF. In the end, no matter how they modify the skills the followers have, if you make them able to be used in the endgame they will be essential. Theres not any way around it. If they give you a benefit, you won't be operating at the peak of your game unless you have one. So the only way around that is to make them give you no benefit when balance between players really matters (aka Hell).
Even without bringing other players into the equation, if you were playing SP Hell, they would have to tune the game around you having a follower and make it challenging with them around. Its not like Normal where they can make it so its just easy with or without the follower. If they allowed them in Hell, that means they would have to make the game difficult with them in Hell, which means it would be nearly impossible without them in Hell. Unless they were useless, which is the current scenario. So they had to choose between making them useless or tuning the game around them, and they chose useless. Obviously you can have a problem with that, but its not like their rationale isn't legitimate.
For the higher difficulties from a game design perspective I just really don't think their explanation adds up. It would surely take them longer to balance for the higher difficulties but I'm willing to wait rather than have them release a half hashed system - it seems almost pointless to have if you can only use it early in the game AND while playing solo (ie: hardly ever for most of us)
I can certainly handle not using it in multiplayer due to screenclutter, this is fair enough and you want to focus on playing with your friends. But surely if they're saying it aids you in single player you're going to need them so so sooooo much more in hell difficulty than in normal? Not to mention the exciting bit of customisation that is going to be exciting at all points in the game (or it should be!)
Very, very disappointing, truly hope blizz turns around on the difficulty part as I thoroughly enjoyed gearing my d2 merc even in endgame
Even without bringing other players into the equation, if you were playing SP Hell, they would have to tune the game around you having a follower and make it challenging with them around. Its not like Normal where they can make it so its just easy with or without the follower. If they allowed them in Hell, that means they would have to make the game difficult with them in Hell, which means it would be nearly impossible without them in Hell. Unless they were useless, which is the current scenario. So they had to choose between making them useless or tuning the game around them, and they chose useless. Obviously you can have a problem with that, but its not like their rationale isn't legitimate.
Yeah I do agree. But in saying that I don't think that mercs were essential in D2, though they were helpful.
The fact that they aren't going to be used in co-op I also agree is a good thing. The game is said to be balanced for co-op play, removing them from this removes the over complication of trying to balance with several players and their followers. I thought the followers would be a good balance mechanism for when you don't have the other players to co-op with? When you remove the other players from a game balanced for co-op this balance is broken anyway. Seems like a lost opportunity to me..
Though I can see both sides of this argument, I still don't think it needs to be so polarized.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool."
Twitter: @FreddyBushBoy
Guess I'm just trying to say that the follower system has a lot of endgame potential, this is a fact, and it doesn't seem right that they're watering it down so much.
If nothing else I hope they fix this with expansions as the system looked like a lot of fun until i found out I could only use it at the start...
The fact is most casuals, which is the majority of the player base, probably don't make it far passed normal.
Now a lot of people may see this as catering to the casuals, but I think that's the way it should be. Nightmare and above should be harder, and about your character, without followers as much. It should also require more team work in multiplayer and less about your follower like in D2.
I don't want people depending on their follower templar to tank things for them when my barbarian could easily do it. With the battles being more strategic and fewer people per game we need to work together and depend on each other more in multiplayer.
Hoping it will make for a better multiplayer and community experience overall.
No where in that quote does it say anything about being one shot in hell. All it says is that they will die more frequently and easier as will all characters that play in a higher difficulty. It only makes sense that they die more often in a harder difficulty. And where does it say it costs to revive them. This is done automatically in the battle field. The only possibility is a dura hit.
If they are involved too much with MF, I don't think they will make them die easier. Just make it so MF gear isn't that viable for them.
Sorry, I was wrong about the gold cost. Bashiok said followers will have a respect cost, and I misread that as a revive cost. However, here is a direct quote from Bashiok about followers being one-shot in Nightmare and Hell, from the Official forums:
Official Blizzard Quote:
They're also tuned so that they become very weak starting in Nightmare, and then are completely unusable in Hell. Even if you're playing alone, you will probably not be using Followers past Normal - - you can try but they're going to just be one-shot back to back. They're there as a bit of flavor, to help get people into the mindset of co-op if they're a bit reluctant, and... that's about it. They won't be usable at end-game, and they'll never replace the abilities and power that another player can bring.
Also, it seems no matter how good the gear you have on them, followers will not survive in higher difficulties. In another quote Bashiok even says Blizzard will ensure followers never become viable at endgame:
Official Blizzard Quote:
Followers will not stay alive easily past Normal, and if they're not alive you aren't going to be getting their bonuses. I'm sure people will try to game this, and ideally they will fail. If not we will ensure followers are not part of the end-game MF equation. They are not intended to be, and we will take whatever steps are necessary to ensure they cannot be.
If followers just provided more story and lore, I don't think people would complain as much. The fact that they gave followers some customization options (gear and skill slots) and then shortly later take followers away from you is what gets people angry.
The fact is most casuals, which is the majority of the player base, probably don't make it far passed normal.
Now a lot of people may see this as catering to the casuals, but I think that's the way it should be. Nightmare and above should be harder, and about your character, without followers as much. It should also require more team work in multiplayer and less about your follower like in D2.
I don't want people depending on their follower templar to tank things for them when my barbarian could easily do it. With the battles being more strategic and fewer people per game we need to work together and depend on each other more in multiplayer.
Hoping it will make for a better multiplayer and community experience overall.
Well said. Come on guys blizzard is really trying to make Diablo 3 a badass game and it will be. Don't be disappointed with followers. It will be awesome w/o them esp. past normal and in co-op. I will never replace my friends to an AI. Maybe in year 3000 where AI is almost as smart as human, lol. Anyway, let's all just wait for the next system and beta!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I love all loot fest kind of game! I will be playing all of them for the next few years. Loot fest games I'm looking forward to: LotR: War in the North,Torchlight 2,Borderlands 2 and of course Diablo 3.
Nightmare and above should be harder, and about your character, without followers as much. It should also require more team work in multiplayer and less about your follower like in D2.
I don't want people depending on their follower templar to tank things for them when my barbarian could easily do it. With the battles being more strategic and fewer people per game we need to work together and depend on each other more in multiplayer.
To me, the point is that if Nightmare and Hell are harder and more about teamwork - what about when you have no team? The game is balanced for team play, and that is how I want to play the game most of the time, but surely some people want to play by themselves sometimes?
Using the followers for this seems like a perfect opportunity and its not competing with co-op play because they can't be involved when people are playing together. Co-op will still be the preferred choice and letting your barbarian or your follower take damage will not be a choice you need make.
This way it could still be about your character AND about team work - even when playing by yourself.
Don't get me wrong - I like the followers. If they stay how they are that's fine by me :-)
It just seems that there is plenty of wiggle room without making them essential OR useless.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool."
Twitter: @FreddyBushBoy
Well that's sort of the thing though. You just said some people want to play by themselves. If they balanced Nightmare and Hell around having a follower with you all the time, then you'd never be able to play by yourself.
I imagine their exact reasoning behind disallowing them after nightmare and hell may have something to do with gold find and magic find? Having a scoundrel with +% gold find in Hell could allow for max gold running and in the end mess with the auction house? Sure they could remove that skill I guess. Who knows what the real reason is, I guess we'll have to wait to find out.
I think it also is a little about if you enjoy playing with another class, such as someone tanking for you, they want you to go online and play there with people.
Yeah it's interesting.. It's bound to be something to do with the gold-find type abilities I recon. Im sure they'll do the right thing.
I guess I just figured the game is already balanced for co-op. Jay Wilson has said a few times that if you play single player you are essentially playing a co-op game alone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool."
Twitter: @FreddyBushBoy
He also might have misspoken. He might have just meant they won't be doing much damage at all. Because the enchantress provides lower resist doesn't she? Which is important especially in Hell.
I sort of wish depending on which follower you took to the end it would have some small effect or something. Like just mentioning them in the story ending. Having them die in the end of Normal would be a good way to not have to include them in further acts if that's really the way they want to go with it. The templar could die in battle, the enchantress become possessed, and the scoundrel gathered his loot and ran away.
How will the game be balanced around the followers?
The followers won't be a massive part of game balance. They're there to make the single-player, normal difficulty experience feel more cooperative and to aid in enhancing the story. These factors lose some importance in multiplayer and in the higher difficulty settings of the game, and as such, the followers won't be as relevant there.
So I'm a little unclear after all the things I've read about followers are they in multiplayer at all and what does it mean their not as important in higher difficulties? Being some one that only ever had 1 character that could do hell in all my time of playing D2 (no friends to play with ) I see followers as a sign to me that I might not get left behind after nightmare.
I had the same question, the way someone explained it to me earlier was that you'll have one in a multiplayer game, until someone enters the game, then they will go back to camp.
As far as their importance in higher difficulties they've made it clear they want them to become less and less useful the further we go, but to what extent we don't know yet. Hopefully some clarification on that soon.
In any case I'm sure Hell won't be as unforgiving this time around in the immunities sense. That was my main beef with it. "I'm a fire/ice sorc. Oh hey cool a unique that's immune to fire AND ice. Awesome."
Well Bashiok has made it pretty clear multiple times that they won't be a factor in Hell and the endgame.
Even though its not about followers, immunities won't be in D3. There will probably still be high-resist monsters though. And without trees characters can be considerably more varied in terms of the kinds of damage they deal.
This entire thread is full of lengthy posts explaining exactly why this system is flawed based on nonexistent evidence and conjecture, so I'll get right to the point.
This system has been tested and iterated and retested by hundreds of people for thousands of hours already, before Alpha even started. Experienced Designers have been retooling and testing it and changing it again until it was damn near perfect, then improving it more. This is their job, and many of them have been doing it since before you put your grubby paws on Warcraft One.
To second guess them, without having even played the game, is criminally stupid.
If you wanted to keep your Follower until later in the game, that's different. Personal taste is one thing.
If you're making judgments about the specific workings of a system you haven't used created by people who thought of every single thing you have already (and more) years ago, that's another thing entirely.
Believe it or not, playing video games does not a Game Designer make.
In any case I'm sure Hell won't be as unforgiving this time around in the immunities sense. That was my main beef with it. "I'm a fire/ice sorc. Oh hey cool a unique that's immune to fire AND ice. Awesome."
That was one the problems I had. The other is the gear gap from nm to hell always seemed a bit wide to me. So I would have gear to run nm with only a death here and there due to the annoying things (you know zealadin meats iron maiden/ anything meats lower resist so on....) But I would zeal the crap out of act 1 mobs and take all die and alot of deaths just to get to and kill andy. Stupid poison damage. -.-
Hehe. Well I'm hoping to form a long lasting relationship with my followers even if it's over many different characters. It'll be hard to say goodbye to them.
This entire thread is full of lengthy posts explaining exactly why this system is flawed based on nonexistent evidence and conjecture, so I'll get right to the point.
This system has been tested and iterated and retested by hundreds of people for thousands of hours already, before Alpha even started. Experienced Designers have been retooling and testing it and changing it again until it was damn near perfect, then improving it more. This is their job, and many of them have been doing it since before you put your grubby paws on Warcraft One.
To second guess them, without having even played the game, is criminally stupid.
If you wanted to keep your Follower until later in the game, that's different. Personal taste is one thing.
If you're making judgments about the specific workings of a system you haven't used created by people who thought of every single thing you have already (and more) years ago, that's another thing entirely.
Believe it or not, playing video games does not a Game Designer make.
OK there are a few problems I have with some things your saying here.....
#1 to call people of the forum having an intelligent conversation/debate (a key purpose for forum to exist) is as you to eloquently put it "criminally stupid"
#2 To the point of being tested and retested I've been apart of a few various betas and things of that nature. And I'll say this now they might have done this a lot for many games BUT!!!!! that doesn't make them immune to getting something wrong or miss judging how people think. I'll concede that they listen to the community well but at the same time they're doing their best to please everyone. This has been the down fall of many people and things.
#3 This goes back to the top. We know they're guesses and lacking information for solid ideas on the matters but in the end this is about us doing something at the very least semi-productive with our time till release. Then we can talk about what actually is all you like.
Great I forgot what I wanted to actauly talk about now that I'm at the end of my rant.... *sigh*
Followers will not stay alive easily past Normal, and if they're not alive you aren't going to be getting their bonuses. I'm sure people will try to game this, and ideally they will fail. If not we will ensure followers are not part of the end-game MF equation. They are not intended to be, and we will take whatever steps are necessary to ensure they cannot be.
If followers just provided more story and lore, I don't think people would complain as much. The fact that they gave followers some customization options (gear and skill slots) and then shortly later take followers away from you is what gets people angry.
On the matter of the Blizzard post here, I don't mind you don't want us to use them later so you can maintain the co-op game. That's fair we're all good there. But, at the same time someone wants to try their best to make it work for them to get use out of some passive or skill and your response is they'll have to go through us first..... yea thats just like WTF why all the hate for the players all the sudden.
Also I have to agree with Thander's last statement. If your just going to take them away anyway then just give us a follower more like the quest related ones they've talked about. This covers the story with no problem without you doing something like; of look a shinny see how it sparkles and shines in the sun, amazing isn't it. (10 seconds later) Well, that's all you get you won't be seeing this nice thing again, bye. i.e. how to induce rage.
By the way, sorry about how negative my posts seem to be today and lengthy....
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am trying to accept why they aren't allowed in multiplayer, too much clutter, and them talking all at once or whatever blah blah blah.
But I think it's stupid to have their effectiveness in difficulties go from, "Cool and awesome sauce" to "Gimp handicap fool" to "Useless decaying OD'in bum" (Also no offense to anyone who may be handicap)
I was like super excited when I first saw the trailer, and now it feels like Blizzard returned my Christmas presents right in front of my damn face.
Well at least in the case of the Scoundrel theres really no use for him if you're a DH except for the MF/GF. In the end, no matter how they modify the skills the followers have, if you make them able to be used in the endgame they will be essential. Theres not any way around it. If they give you a benefit, you won't be operating at the peak of your game unless you have one. So the only way around that is to make them give you no benefit when balance between players really matters (aka Hell).
Even without bringing other players into the equation, if you were playing SP Hell, they would have to tune the game around you having a follower and make it challenging with them around. Its not like Normal where they can make it so its just easy with or without the follower. If they allowed them in Hell, that means they would have to make the game difficult with them in Hell, which means it would be nearly impossible without them in Hell. Unless they were useless, which is the current scenario. So they had to choose between making them useless or tuning the game around them, and they chose useless. Obviously you can have a problem with that, but its not like their rationale isn't legitimate.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
I can certainly handle not using it in multiplayer due to screenclutter, this is fair enough and you want to focus on playing with your friends. But surely if they're saying it aids you in single player you're going to need them so so sooooo much more in hell difficulty than in normal? Not to mention the exciting bit of customisation that is going to be exciting at all points in the game (or it should be!)
Very, very disappointing, truly hope blizz turns around on the difficulty part as I thoroughly enjoyed gearing my d2 merc even in endgame
The fact that they aren't going to be used in co-op I also agree is a good thing. The game is said to be balanced for co-op play, removing them from this removes the over complication of trying to balance with several players and their followers. I thought the followers would be a good balance mechanism for when you don't have the other players to co-op with? When you remove the other players from a game balanced for co-op this balance is broken anyway. Seems like a lost opportunity to me..
Though I can see both sides of this argument, I still don't think it needs to be so polarized.
Twitter: @FreddyBushBoy
If nothing else I hope they fix this with expansions as the system looked like a lot of fun until i found out I could only use it at the start...
Now a lot of people may see this as catering to the casuals, but I think that's the way it should be. Nightmare and above should be harder, and about your character, without followers as much. It should also require more team work in multiplayer and less about your follower like in D2.
I don't want people depending on their follower templar to tank things for them when my barbarian could easily do it. With the battles being more strategic and fewer people per game we need to work together and depend on each other more in multiplayer.
Hoping it will make for a better multiplayer and community experience overall.
Sorry, I was wrong about the gold cost. Bashiok said followers will have a respect cost, and I misread that as a revive cost. However, here is a direct quote from Bashiok about followers being one-shot in Nightmare and Hell, from the Official forums:
Official Blizzard Quote:
They're also tuned so that they become very weak starting in Nightmare, and then are completely unusable in Hell. Even if you're playing alone, you will probably not be using Followers past Normal - - you can try but they're going to just be one-shot back to back. They're there as a bit of flavor, to help get people into the mindset of co-op if they're a bit reluctant, and... that's about it. They won't be usable at end-game, and they'll never replace the abilities and power that another player can bring.
Also, it seems no matter how good the gear you have on them, followers will not survive in higher difficulties. In another quote Bashiok even says Blizzard will ensure followers never become viable at endgame:
Official Blizzard Quote:
Followers will not stay alive easily past Normal, and if they're not alive you aren't going to be getting their bonuses. I'm sure people will try to game this, and ideally they will fail. If not we will ensure followers are not part of the end-game MF equation. They are not intended to be, and we will take whatever steps are necessary to ensure they cannot be.
If followers just provided more story and lore, I don't think people would complain as much. The fact that they gave followers some customization options (gear and skill slots) and then shortly later take followers away from you is what gets people angry.
Well said. Come on guys blizzard is really trying to make Diablo 3 a badass game and it will be. Don't be disappointed with followers. It will be awesome w/o them esp. past normal and in co-op. I will never replace my friends to an AI. Maybe in year 3000 where AI is almost as smart as human, lol. Anyway, let's all just wait for the next system and beta!
To me, the point is that if Nightmare and Hell are harder and more about teamwork - what about when you have no team? The game is balanced for team play, and that is how I want to play the game most of the time, but surely some people want to play by themselves sometimes?
Using the followers for this seems like a perfect opportunity and its not competing with co-op play because they can't be involved when people are playing together. Co-op will still be the preferred choice and letting your barbarian or your follower take damage will not be a choice you need make.
This way it could still be about your character AND about team work - even when playing by yourself.
Don't get me wrong - I like the followers. If they stay how they are that's fine by me :-)
It just seems that there is plenty of wiggle room without making them essential OR useless.
Twitter: @FreddyBushBoy
I imagine their exact reasoning behind disallowing them after nightmare and hell may have something to do with gold find and magic find? Having a scoundrel with +% gold find in Hell could allow for max gold running and in the end mess with the auction house? Sure they could remove that skill I guess. Who knows what the real reason is, I guess we'll have to wait to find out.
I think it also is a little about if you enjoy playing with another class, such as someone tanking for you, they want you to go online and play there with people.
I guess I just figured the game is already balanced for co-op. Jay Wilson has said a few times that if you play single player you are essentially playing a co-op game alone.
Twitter: @FreddyBushBoy
I sort of wish depending on which follower you took to the end it would have some small effect or something. Like just mentioning them in the story ending. Having them die in the end of Normal would be a good way to not have to include them in further acts if that's really the way they want to go with it. The templar could die in battle, the enchantress become possessed, and the scoundrel gathered his loot and ran away.
I'm a sucker for small tie ins.
How will the game be balanced around the followers?
The followers won't be a massive part of game balance. They're there to make the single-player, normal difficulty experience feel more cooperative and to aid in enhancing the story. These factors lose some importance in multiplayer and in the higher difficulty settings of the game, and as such, the followers won't be as relevant there.
So I'm a little unclear after all the things I've read about followers are they in multiplayer at all and what does it mean their not as important in higher difficulties? Being some one that only ever had 1 character that could do hell in all my time of playing D2 (no friends to play with ) I see followers as a sign to me that I might not get left behind after nightmare.
As far as their importance in higher difficulties they've made it clear they want them to become less and less useful the further we go, but to what extent we don't know yet. Hopefully some clarification on that soon.
In any case I'm sure Hell won't be as unforgiving this time around in the immunities sense. That was my main beef with it. "I'm a fire/ice sorc. Oh hey cool a unique that's immune to fire AND ice. Awesome."
Even though its not about followers, immunities won't be in D3. There will probably still be high-resist monsters though. And without trees characters can be considerably more varied in terms of the kinds of damage they deal.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
This system has been tested and iterated and retested by hundreds of people for thousands of hours already, before Alpha even started. Experienced Designers have been retooling and testing it and changing it again until it was damn near perfect, then improving it more. This is their job, and many of them have been doing it since before you put your grubby paws on Warcraft One.
To second guess them, without having even played the game, is criminally stupid.
If you wanted to keep your Follower until later in the game, that's different. Personal taste is one thing.
If you're making judgments about the specific workings of a system you haven't used created by people who thought of every single thing you have already (and more) years ago, that's another thing entirely.
Believe it or not, playing video games does not a Game Designer make.
That was one the problems I had. The other is the gear gap from nm to hell always seemed a bit wide to me. So I would have gear to run nm with only a death here and there due to the annoying things (you know zealadin meats iron maiden/ anything meats lower resist so on....) But I would zeal the crap out of act 1 mobs and take all die and alot of deaths just to get to and kill andy. Stupid poison damage. -.-
I also love how Templars can have heal.
OK there are a few problems I have with some things your saying here.....
#1 to call people of the forum having an intelligent conversation/debate (a key purpose for forum to exist) is as you to eloquently put it "criminally stupid"
#2 To the point of being tested and retested I've been apart of a few various betas and things of that nature. And I'll say this now they might have done this a lot for many games BUT!!!!! that doesn't make them immune to getting something wrong or miss judging how people think. I'll concede that they listen to the community well but at the same time they're doing their best to please everyone. This has been the down fall of many people and things.
#3 This goes back to the top. We know they're guesses and lacking information for solid ideas on the matters but in the end this is about us doing something at the very least semi-productive with our time till release. Then we can talk about what actually is all you like.
Great I forgot what I wanted to actauly talk about now that I'm at the end of my rant.... *sigh*
On the matter of the Blizzard post here, I don't mind you don't want us to use them later so you can maintain the co-op game. That's fair we're all good there. But, at the same time someone wants to try their best to make it work for them to get use out of some passive or skill and your response is they'll have to go through us first..... yea thats just like WTF why all the hate for the players all the sudden.
Also I have to agree with Thander's last statement. If your just going to take them away anyway then just give us a follower more like the quest related ones they've talked about. This covers the story with no problem without you doing something like; of look a shinny see how it sparkles and shines in the sun, amazing isn't it. (10 seconds later) Well, that's all you get you won't be seeing this nice thing again, bye. i.e. how to induce rage.
By the way, sorry about how negative my posts seem to be today and lengthy....