No one would do raid content unless the rewards were better than solo mf. This would make raid content compulsory for anyone interested in excelling, a la WoW, which goes completely and utterly against the spirit of diablo.
Completely agree. THE main reason I left WOW was cause of the NEED to raid if you wanted the best gear. Im sorry but i dnt have that much time to give to a group of people and would rather find gear solo like Diablo MF runs. awwww. MF i love that acronym.
Gone will be the days of a Sorc and Pala spamming their spells and pwning everything while 6 other people stand in the corner and pick their ass.
It really is annoying that 6 people can just hang back and do nothing, but isn't that a problem with the scalability of Diablo 2? If you ask me Blizzard should have spent a bit more testing time with 8 players. They would have found that the game is far too easy with their current max player count and modified how hard the enemies were with 8 people in the game.
I think one problem with this discussion is that everyone is bringing up problems that could very easily be isolated issues in Diablo 2. After all, Blizzard made 40 players work in a WoW raid, why couldn't 8 players be fixed up a bit and made to work in Diablo 3?
The only valid issues I see in the conversation so far is the problem of the screen being covered in spell effects, everything else is just a development hurdle that can be overcome if Blizzard puts their minds to it. 2 people are pwning bosses in an 8 player game? Bump up the monster damage and hit points per-player until every party member is necessary. And as far as the spell effects are concerned, I enjoyed seeing the screen filled with skeletons, blizzards, meteors, hydras, frozen orbs, hammers, cyclones, etc... It made me feel like I was part of a truly powerful party capable of taking on the Prime Evils.
In other words, if they include 8 players in Diablo 3 and it still feels wrong, it's not that 8 is a bad player count, it's that Blizzard didn't put enough effort towards attaining perfect scalability.
Yea. I really though Blizz had screwed up on scaling on D2. they just did a horrible job when it got to 8 people in one game. I think it's safe to say that not a single thing in the game was actually challenging with a full game. I remember running both Meph and Diablo before the Baal run even began lol.
I think one problem with this discussion is that everyone is bringing up problems that could very easily be isolated issues in Diablo 2. After all, Blizzard made 40 players work in a WoW raid, why couldn't 8 players be fixed up a bit and made to work in Diablo 3?
The only valid issues I see in the conversation so far is the problem of the screen being covered in spell effects, everything else is just a development hurdle that can be overcome if Blizzard puts their minds to it. 2 people are pwning bosses in an 8 player game? Bump up the monster damage and hit points per-player until every party member is necessary. And as far as the spell effects are concerned, I enjoyed seeing the screen filled with skeletons, blizzards, meteors, hydras, frozen orbs, hammers, cyclones, etc... It made me feel like I was part of a truly powerful party capable of taking on the Prime Evils.
In other words, if they include 8 players in Diablo 3 and it still feels wrong, it's not that 8 is a bad player count, it's that Blizzard didn't put enough effort towards attaining perfect scalability.
You win post of the day. Anything blizzard changes, no matter how absurd or unwarranted, these people will invent justifications for.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
zsfh-maz of UsWest, 95 BvB king
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
No one would do raid content unless the rewards were better than solo mf. This would make raid content compulsory for anyone interested in excelling, a la WoW, which goes completely and utterly against the spirit of diablo.
I agree, but I know what was implied by the "raid" type thing. It's really fun to have a bunch of people together against one boss, and dividing the loot evenly. Unfortunately, you are right about everyone compulsively raiding for better gear ruining the spirit of diablo.
You win post of the day. Anything blizzard changes, no matter how absurd or unwarranted, these people will invent justifications for.
lol ty for the compliment
I mean, if Blizzard just thinks it's impossible to scale the game correctly above 4 players, that's understandable, but they can't try to blame it on anything other than their inability to get it right. It would be really hard to make a game scale perfectly in difficulty from 1-8 players unless you've been working on the game for a ridiculously long time. Oh wait...
I mean, if Blizzard just thinks it's impossible to scale the game correctly above 4 players, that's understandable, but they can't try to blame it on anything other than their inability to get it right. It would be really hard to make a game scale perfectly in difficulty from 1-8 players unless you've been working on the game for a ridiculously long time. Oh wait...
lol..
I think 4-5 is good..
One of my favorite things in late D2 lod was searching for keys, and uber D, and clone D..
Its the craziest thing, but was annoying how only Paladins had advantage.
Can someone explain raids? I don't play wow..
I wouldn't mind getting a big group of people, say 8-15 (Diablo - scaled) to take down a beast, or to hold off an army of minions as long as possible.
I realized from cod Waw, that zombies mode is my favorite. People can see how long they can last against waves of minions, IT IS AMAZINGLY FUN.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not Even Death Can Save You From Me" ~ Diablo (II)
If the Party combat is truly dynamic and fun with just 4 players perhaps thats a good thing. An in depth storyline in D3 would surly benefit from less players with masses of monsters. thus creating a more panicked environment. as opposed to having all the classes available in one game players would need to adapt their strategies to defeat enemies instead of just using each classes most damaging spell to mash through levels as quickly as possible.
just a thought.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]I find your lack of faithdisturbing.
It's basically a really hard boss that requires a large group of people to coordinate well in order to complete. I strongly believe this doesn't have a place in Diablo, though, because Diablo games should be completable solo.
Quote from "DarkMagicc" »
I wouldn't mind getting a big group of people, say 8-15 (Diablo - scaled) to take down a beast, or to hold off an army of minions as long as possible.
I think it would be fun to allow more than 8 players in certain circumstances. For example, in trading games, or in PvP matches/tournaments. A Horde mode a la Gears of War 2 would be pretty awesome. Perhaps it'd be a minigame where the Prime Evils have completely overrun sanctuary with demons and you're making a last stand at Tristram. A literally unbeatable legion of demons to see how long you can survive!
Can someone explain raids? I don't play wow..
I wouldn't mind getting a big group of people, say 8-15 (Diablo - scaled) to take down a beast, or to hold off an army of minions as long as possible.
Well, im not the best source but a Raid in wow is a large group of people seperated into sub groups of five. The main objective is to finish a special raid "dungeon" which requires more than the regular group of five pleyers to finish. The bosses to these raids have Huge Hp pools so it takes a while to take them down. These end game raids were the only way to get the "best" gear in wow. The Gear however is not given to you just cause you want it. There is A LOT of politics involved when it comes to WoW raids. It can take up to several runs of the same raid before you get finally get that Uber epic gear you want. Raids are btw VERY time consuming...there is lots more to tell but you should consult a wow elder (lol) for that. I was still mostly a noob when i left wow.
It's basically a really hard boss that requires a large group of people to coordinate well in order to complete. I strongly believe this doesn't have a place in Diablo, though, because Diablo games should be completable solo.
I think it would be fun to allow more than 8 players in certain circumstances. For example, in trading games, or in PvP matches/tournaments. A Horde mode a la Gears of War 2 would be pretty awesome. Perhaps it'd be a minigame where the Prime Evils have completely overrun sanctuary with demons and you're making a last stand at Tristram. A literally unbeatable legion of demons to see how long you can survive!
yea, that s what I said..but for gameplay 4 -5 PLAYERS ONLY.
For separate instances I dont care..
Also, in diablo, a character alone should be able to beat the whole game.
it should be quite difficult to solo, but adding a player should make it hard enough that one average player would have a hard time soloing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not Even Death Can Save You From Me" ~ Diablo (II)
Which can easily be fixed through forced lowered special effects settings when playing with more players, as I said in a previous post. If the players wants the best "normal" experience they will have to play as 4 or 5.
The damage/hp scaling won't be a problem if blizzard balances the game. But the percentual loss of party members when dieing with 8 compared to 4-5 players is way different. In a 4-5 team i could see perhaps one player beeing a barbarian tank, thus, losing him/her would be fatal to the team. But with a 8 player team you could easily have 3 barbs, they would be able to work as a team and share the damage taken in a way 1 barb couln't. Therefor 8 players will be easyer than 4-5, no matter how much you increase the enemies power. Unless the monsters are made so powerful that you HAD to stick together to stand a chance of survival. But then the casters would take to much damage if a random monster attacked them.
Another reason for 5 players that i (as far as i can see) has not been brought up is that with a 5 player setup. You would have one char class each, thereby having the optimal team. But perhaps that is what blizzard wants to avoid. Perhaps they want to make us choose to leave one class behind to not make the parties to optimal...
I'd say 4 or 5 for now, unless blizzard finds a magic way of balancing. And then increasing to 6 in a expansion when you get more classes. That would make the LAN people buy the expansion for sure^^
Lots of good points here. However, I still wouldn't say it'd be impossible to balance 8 players. Sure, 3 Barbs provides more tanking power, but less DPS. I mean, if you're able to figure out the best combination of classes and spells that makes the game easier, shouldn't you be rewarded by mowing down the baddies with less resistance?
One idea that I think has gone unnoticed is the possibility of variable difficulty levels beyond the standard Normal, Nightmare, and Hell. In other words, there could be 3 or 4 different difficulties to play in Normal mode like Easy, Standard, Hard, and (one of Blizzard's faves) Insane. In Diablo 2, the distinction between Normal, Nightmare, and Hell was more frequent encounters with unique monsters and more immunities. This could be the same in Diablo 3, but in the expanded difficulties you'd encounter the same number of immunities/unique monsters, but all the monsters would get progressively more hit points and damage.
In these expanded difficulties, experience rewards should be the same so that everyone levels up at the same pace, but there should be other benefits of playing the harder difficulties, such as greater loot.
Since you'll inevitably run into the problem of people mastering the game and easily conquering any challenge, the Insane - Hell difficulty should be unbeatable to all of the testers. This will ensure that it will take a long time of b.net users discovering amazing gear/spell combinations and working out excellent strategy.
In a 4-5 team i could see perhaps one player beeing a barbarian tank, thus, losing him/her would be fatal to the team. But with a 8 player team you could easily have 3 barbs, they would be able to work as a team and share the damage taken in a way 1 barb couln't. Therefor 8 players will be easyer than 4-5, no matter how much you increase the enemies power. Unless the monsters are made so powerful that you HAD to stick together to stand a chance of survival. But then the casters would take to much damage if a random monster attacked them.
DIABLO ISN'T ABOUT TEAMWORK. It isn't about 'tanks' and 'damage dealers' and 'healers' and 'support classes'. Get it through your thick skull. The only teamwork that has ever been (and should ever be) present in diablo is the combined force of self sufficient entities. I shouldn't need a barb to use his "increase fire vulnerability" skill (imaginary) just so that my wizard can do decent damage with a fireball. Synergistic effects between skills of different classes, healing, and anything else requiring a combination of classes to work properly have absolutely no place in diablo.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
zsfh-maz of UsWest, 95 BvB king
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
DIABLO ISN'T ABOUT TEAMWORK. It isn't about 'tanks' and 'damage dealers' and 'healers' and 'support classes'. Get it through your thick skull. The only teamwork that has ever been (and should ever be) present in diablo is the combined force of self sufficient entities. I shouldn't need a barb to use his "increase fire vulnerability" skill (imaginary) just so that my wizard can do decent damage with a fireball. Synergistic effects between skills of different classes, healing, and anything else requiring a combination of classes to work properly have absolutely no place in diablo.
Im sorry, then what is the whole 4 player max debate about again?...oh yes. TEAMWORK. Why such a big debate over something that has no place in Diablo? Either 4 or 8 max it does not make a difference if Diablo is not about Teamwork as you say.
DIABLO ISN'T ABOUT TEAMWORK. It isn't about 'tanks' and 'damage dealers' and 'healers' and 'support classes'. Get it through your thick skull. The only teamwork that has ever been (and should ever be) present in diablo is the combined force of self sufficient entities. I shouldn't need a barb to use his "increase fire vulnerability" skill (imaginary) just so that my wizard can do decent damage with a fireball. Synergistic effects between skills of different classes, healing, and anything else requiring a combination of classes to work properly have absolutely no place in diablo.
You Sir, are an Idiot!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not Even Death Can Save You From Me" ~ Diablo (II)
1. I personally don't like the idea of making the game easier depending on what classes you choose to play together with, with the exception of barbs which are excellent tanks, all characters has a decent offensive ability. And as blizzard has said, they are trying to avoid making any "best" spell combo. Thats why we have the modified runes. Every WD will be different from the other (not litteraly :P)
2. I like the idea of more difficulties, but would that solve the balancing issue? The idea is great, everyone likes more difficulties to complete. But what about making a separate "Team" game style with separate difficulties and where you only play with 5-8 people, or even more? That way you can choose the regular game type with 4 max players, or the team one where you always play with many. It would also make it easier to balance for blizz, since they would be dividing small parties from big parties. Thus making the gap between small and big cut in half.
3. The Insane difficulty is a superb idea!, I guess you mean a mode that you would need a fully coordinated team in near max level with great gear to complete I love it, it would be the ultimate proof of power!!!
at least she/he understands something about the direction of D3.. unlike the other kid..
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not Even Death Can Save You From Me" ~ Diablo (II)
Im sorry, then what is the whole 4 player max debate about again?...oh yes. TEAMWORK. Why such a big debate over something that has no place in Diablo? Either 4 or 8 max it does not make a difference if Diablo is not about Teamwork as you say.
No. The player count debate is about how many friends you can play with and how many people can pvp in the same game. Seriously, how many times are you going to run through the acts until you get bored? 10,000? I got bored at about the 10th time through, I guess it takes some people thousands of times that. Playing with friends and pvping made the game fun for 6 years+. Those are the aspects of gameplay that will keep D3 going once pvm has become ancient: socialization and pvp.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
zsfh-maz of UsWest, 95 BvB king
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
No. The player count debate is about how many friends you can play with and how many people can pvp in the same game. Seriously, how many times are you going to run through the acts until you get bored? 10,000? I got bored at about the 10th time through, I guess it takes some people thousands of times that. Playing with friends and pvping made the game fun for 6 years+. Those are the aspects of gameplay that will keep D3 going once pvm has become ancient: socialization and pvp.
You probably don't even realize how telling it is that you used "direction of D3" instead of "tradition of diablo". You're the one who sounds like a little child, which you probably are.
I don't want to continue this argument, so I am sorry for offending you. In my opinion, traditions in D2 is the isometric point of view, the point and click mechanic, having a story about a battle of hell, and heaven, and sanctuary (I'm no expert on lore).
For many posts I have written I repeated over and over again, for STORY, AND ACTUAL STORYLINE PLAYING I would like 4-5 people. FOR ANY OTHER TYPE OF GAME PLAY, SUCH AS "RAIDING", PVP'ING, OR ANY OTHER EXTRAS OTHER THAN STORYLINE GAMEPLAY I DON'T CARE ABOUT # OF PLAYERS.
Now, sorry for insulting you,
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not Even Death Can Save You From Me" ~ Diablo (II)
The first rule of internet arguments is to never apologize. Why humble yourself to some jerkoff thousands of miles away who could be a fatass 50 year old still living in his mom's basement. It's almost as bad as Obama, president of the United States and most powerful man in the world, bowing to some filthy madarjendeh as arabistan. But I'm not going to go into that.
As far as your desires on # of players per game...use the fucking player limit that's already implemented in D2 and will surely be present in D3. I don't see why your foolish and shortsighted desire to have small groups of players play through the short-lived story should extend to EVERY OTHER GAME ON BNET (99% of which, after one year, will be trade/duel/friend social/mf games, all of which are benefitted by having more players).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
zsfh-maz of UsWest, 95 BvB king
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Completely agree. THE main reason I left WOW was cause of the NEED to raid if you wanted the best gear. Im sorry but i dnt have that much time to give to a group of people and would rather find gear solo like Diablo MF runs. awwww. MF i love that acronym.
I think one problem with this discussion is that everyone is bringing up problems that could very easily be isolated issues in Diablo 2. After all, Blizzard made 40 players work in a WoW raid, why couldn't 8 players be fixed up a bit and made to work in Diablo 3?
The only valid issues I see in the conversation so far is the problem of the screen being covered in spell effects, everything else is just a development hurdle that can be overcome if Blizzard puts their minds to it. 2 people are pwning bosses in an 8 player game? Bump up the monster damage and hit points per-player until every party member is necessary. And as far as the spell effects are concerned, I enjoyed seeing the screen filled with skeletons, blizzards, meteors, hydras, frozen orbs, hammers, cyclones, etc... It made me feel like I was part of a truly powerful party capable of taking on the Prime Evils.
In other words, if they include 8 players in Diablo 3 and it still feels wrong, it's not that 8 is a bad player count, it's that Blizzard didn't put enough effort towards attaining perfect scalability.
You win post of the day. Anything blizzard changes, no matter how absurd or unwarranted, these people will invent justifications for.
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
I agree, but I know what was implied by the "raid" type thing. It's really fun to have a bunch of people together against one boss, and dividing the loot evenly. Unfortunately, you are right about everyone compulsively raiding for better gear ruining the spirit of diablo.
I mean, if Blizzard just thinks it's impossible to scale the game correctly above 4 players, that's understandable, but they can't try to blame it on anything other than their inability to get it right. It would be really hard to make a game scale perfectly in difficulty from 1-8 players unless you've been working on the game for a ridiculously long time. Oh wait...
lol..
I think 4-5 is good..
One of my favorite things in late D2 lod was searching for keys, and uber D, and clone D..
Its the craziest thing, but was annoying how only Paladins had advantage.
Can someone explain raids? I don't play wow..
I wouldn't mind getting a big group of people, say 8-15 (Diablo - scaled) to take down a beast, or to hold off an army of minions as long as possible.
I realized from cod Waw, that zombies mode is my favorite. People can see how long they can last against waves of minions, IT IS AMAZINGLY FUN.
just a thought.
I think it would be fun to allow more than 8 players in certain circumstances. For example, in trading games, or in PvP matches/tournaments. A Horde mode a la Gears of War 2 would be pretty awesome. Perhaps it'd be a minigame where the Prime Evils have completely overrun sanctuary with demons and you're making a last stand at Tristram. A literally unbeatable legion of demons to see how long you can survive!
Well, im not the best source but a Raid in wow is a large group of people seperated into sub groups of five. The main objective is to finish a special raid "dungeon" which requires more than the regular group of five pleyers to finish. The bosses to these raids have Huge Hp pools so it takes a while to take them down. These end game raids were the only way to get the "best" gear in wow. The Gear however is not given to you just cause you want it. There is A LOT of politics involved when it comes to WoW raids. It can take up to several runs of the same raid before you get finally get that Uber epic gear you want. Raids are btw VERY time consuming...there is lots more to tell but you should consult a wow elder (lol) for that. I was still mostly a noob when i left wow.
yea, that s what I said..but for gameplay 4 -5 PLAYERS ONLY.
For separate instances I dont care..
Also, in diablo, a character alone should be able to beat the whole game.
it should be quite difficult to solo, but adding a player should make it hard enough that one average player would have a hard time soloing.
One idea that I think has gone unnoticed is the possibility of variable difficulty levels beyond the standard Normal, Nightmare, and Hell. In other words, there could be 3 or 4 different difficulties to play in Normal mode like Easy, Standard, Hard, and (one of Blizzard's faves) Insane. In Diablo 2, the distinction between Normal, Nightmare, and Hell was more frequent encounters with unique monsters and more immunities. This could be the same in Diablo 3, but in the expanded difficulties you'd encounter the same number of immunities/unique monsters, but all the monsters would get progressively more hit points and damage.
In these expanded difficulties, experience rewards should be the same so that everyone levels up at the same pace, but there should be other benefits of playing the harder difficulties, such as greater loot.
Since you'll inevitably run into the problem of people mastering the game and easily conquering any challenge, the Insane - Hell difficulty should be unbeatable to all of the testers. This will ensure that it will take a long time of b.net users discovering amazing gear/spell combinations and working out excellent strategy.
Yes I would like a challenge for once. I remember doing 95% of the three Modes (normal, nightmare, and hell) comepletely by myself (hammerdin).
DIABLO ISN'T ABOUT TEAMWORK. It isn't about 'tanks' and 'damage dealers' and 'healers' and 'support classes'. Get it through your thick skull. The only teamwork that has ever been (and should ever be) present in diablo is the combined force of self sufficient entities. I shouldn't need a barb to use his "increase fire vulnerability" skill (imaginary) just so that my wizard can do decent damage with a fireball. Synergistic effects between skills of different classes, healing, and anything else requiring a combination of classes to work properly have absolutely no place in diablo.
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
Im sorry, then what is the whole 4 player max debate about again?...oh yes. TEAMWORK. Why such a big debate over something that has no place in Diablo? Either 4 or 8 max it does not make a difference if Diablo is not about Teamwork as you say.
You Sir, are an Idiot!
at least she/he understands something about the direction of D3.. unlike the other kid..
No. The player count debate is about how many friends you can play with and how many people can pvp in the same game. Seriously, how many times are you going to run through the acts until you get bored? 10,000? I got bored at about the 10th time through, I guess it takes some people thousands of times that. Playing with friends and pvping made the game fun for 6 years+. Those are the aspects of gameplay that will keep D3 going once pvm has become ancient: socialization and pvp.
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
I don't want to continue this argument, so I am sorry for offending you. In my opinion, traditions in D2 is the isometric point of view, the point and click mechanic, having a story about a battle of hell, and heaven, and sanctuary (I'm no expert on lore).
For many posts I have written I repeated over and over again, for STORY, AND ACTUAL STORYLINE PLAYING I would like 4-5 people. FOR ANY OTHER TYPE OF GAME PLAY, SUCH AS "RAIDING", PVP'ING, OR ANY OTHER EXTRAS OTHER THAN STORYLINE GAMEPLAY I DON'T CARE ABOUT # OF PLAYERS.
Now, sorry for insulting you,
The first rule of internet arguments is to never apologize. Why humble yourself to some jerkoff thousands of miles away who could be a fatass 50 year old still living in his mom's basement. It's almost as bad as Obama, president of the United States and most powerful man in the world, bowing to some filthy madarjendeh as arabistan. But I'm not going to go into that.
As far as your desires on # of players per game...use the fucking player limit that's already implemented in D2 and will surely be present in D3. I don't see why your foolish and shortsighted desire to have small groups of players play through the short-lived story should extend to EVERY OTHER GAME ON BNET (99% of which, after one year, will be trade/duel/friend social/mf games, all of which are benefitted by having more players).
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3