I have always been of the opinion that the blocking of attacks, whether they be melee, ranged or magical be implemented into any game featuring combat.
My reasoning for this is that the inability to block, negatively affects the visual style and gameplay. It removes a player skill factor, and it is also unrealistic. Allow me to elaborate;
The visual style suffers because what you see are opponents relentlessly hacking at each other with no apparent concern for their own safety - the ol' silly "swapping punches" thing. The gameplay suffers because the winner is determined entirely by who has the higher level, the best gear and the fastest clicker finger, consequently a skill factor is removed. Finally, one need only watch any professional fighting sport to realise that blocking is essential and that not doing so amounts to folly. Therefore the absence of blocking in a game is unrealistic.
Games necessarilly implement a "hit or miss" system, but unless a blocking or dodge animation is triggered on a miss, the visual style suffers terribly. (Take any RPG where one faces an opponent X levels lower, have the player opt to do nothing, and watch the enemy swing and miss, grunting endlessly while the player character stands there motionless, perhaps even with weapon sheathed)
Some games implement a "chance to block" system, but this is flawed because it does not address the visual style or skill factor issues and takes control away from the player. I believe players want to control and win a game with skill, not % chance.
Ever see a good martial arts movie? Tons of blocking. Ever see Gandalf fight the Balrog in Lord of the Rings? Blocking. Ever see Yoda absorb the force electricity bolts from the Sith Emperor in Star Wars?
Yeah. BLOCKING ROCKS THE HOUSE PEOPLE! Its hands down, err up, cool. :cool:
I'm interested to know how Blizzard intends to implement blocking in Diablo 3.
As far as I know, I don't think they've talked at all about blocking. Blocking was, as we all know, featured as a modifier in Diablo II and worked in tandem with your Dexterity stat. It can be very useful- I always do my best to max block when I make melee characters.
I hope it's in the game- it added another degree of strategy that most newer players did not consider when they chose what gear to use and what gear to trash. Maybe, of course, revamped somehow, more creatively, to make it more dynamic (but I don't think I would want it as a button to mash or anything).
Well, if Blizzard did decided to go with the blocking scheme again, it would rather proove difficult modifying the blocking % to your fitting due to the auto assign feature for stats on diablo III. Maybe Blizzard will have this feature on the individual armor you wear and that is it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Those before me shall quiver in my wake as I unleash the fury within!
"Active blocking" or any control on blocking = bad.
No blocking unrealistic? Sorry. Do you realize what kind of game it is? You level up, you gain stats, and things changes like this.
There are plenty of skills in this game and in any games like this one. If your concern is PvP, and that both people just hold the mouse button until one is dead, then this has nothing to do with having blocking or not.
Have you ever played any games with extensive blocking abilities instead of comparing it with....... movies? And I mean in games that work even remotely in a way like Diablo.
Let me make it short for you: its incredibly horrible. It is either useless (because it is too weak) or abused to death, and fights become mainly nothing but blocking and counter. This is an absolutely horrible way to go.
Blocking can also not be used as a reaction tool especially for close combat, since unless the combat is insanely slow, you can't react fast enough. Its a matter of luck, or just holding block forever until there is a hole to attack.
I hope you understand the insane impact this would have on the gameplay, and not in a good way. You point out at neat looking examples and talk about how it affects the "visual style", but you completely disregard anything it actually does to the gamepaly. You just assume "players must block themselves = more skill from the player = realistic = good". I'm sorry, but that way of thinking is flawed here.
So here you go. Blocking will be not unlike D2, or WoW. Random chance to block attacks. Don't expect anything shiny. They are not going to destroy the game.
I'm with SFJake as well, active block has no place in D3.
Quote from "italofoca" »
Tell me one game that it's gameplay is ruined by the Active Block mechanic.
Ever play Oblivion ?
That game itself was quite good, but the combat system was so unbearably easy, and insanely boring.
The only way I could actually get some fun out of that combat system, was to simply dodge and evade attacks. Blocking felt way too easy, so I avoided it entirely.
But for those who did use the block system, basically you held block until an attack, then attacked after a successful block. This led to very repetitive and unchallenging gameplay.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "Sixen" »
"One in every 10 million people can potentially have a headache from this pill." God forbid she is the 0.000000001% of having a headache.
But we're not going to start that argument, right? Because that would be off topic.
I wasn't aware that the OP was presenting this suggestion as "active block". Chance to Block worked fine in Diablo II- most of the time it showed your character blocking when auto-blocking kicked in, and it takes a certain amount of wisdom to know how much to put in to Dexterity (and, conversely, how much to sacrifice for block when you could put it in to something else, like Vitality), what gear to wear if you're interested in blocking, and so on. That system was fine and simple.
I'm with SFJake as well, active block has no place in D3.
Ever play Oblivion ?
That game itself was quite good, but the combat system was so unbearably easy, and insanely boring.
The only way I could actually get some fun out of that combat system, was to simply dodge and evade attacks. Blocking felt way too easy, so I avoided it entirely.
But for those who did use the block system, basically you held block until an attack, then attacked after a successful block. This led to very repetitive and unchallenging gameplay.
Someone played on the lowest difficulty possible. If you turn the difficulty all the way up, unless your skill is 100, you'll skill be taking damage, and your blocks will often fail, causing you to stumble, as you probably know.
Anyway, block might be a good idea if they do it right. Some sort of mix between passive and active.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Vampire Lives Eternally. It Was Promised Eternal Death.
Anyway, block might be a good idea if they do it right. Some sort of mix between passive and active.
For block to work, it needs more.
Look at a fighting game and what makes Blocking a successful tool? There are many ways to counter it. Generally too, blocking does not block everything and there is multiple kind of blocking (generally standing or crouching).
There needs to be things that counter blocking entirely as well. Super powerful attacks that break blocking is lame - but it works. Various kinds of "throwing" attacks work.
My point? Doing this right means changing the game quite dramatically and balancing it all for it. If done even slightly work as well, it turns into crap. If only added for the sake of active blocking and adding something to the current game, its pointless.
I'm with SFJake as well, active block has no place in D3.
Ever play Oblivion ?
That game itself was quite good, but the combat system was so unbearably easy, and insanely boring.
The only way I could actually get some fun out of that combat system, was to simply dodge and evade attacks. Blocking felt way too easy, so I avoided it entirely.
But for those who did use the block system, basically you held block until an attack, then attacked after a successful block. This led to very repetitive and unchallenging gameplay.
The problem with oblivion is far beyond the block. The FPS factor (when playing with thief or mage archetype) are equally terrible and the special melee attacks are very crude. The whole gameplay of oblivion are bad.
The problem of block is that it was OP, so like any OP feature in a game ppl will abuse it. The problem is the balance and how it was implemented and not the fact that it was there.
For exemple, Jedi Knight is a game that have very similar gameplay of oblivion (though it's much more a FPS and less RPG then Oblivion) but have a block system and it works prety well.
If you stop to think a block is not more OP then a teleportation in any means.
Teleportation = Ignore attacks and move to target location.
Block = "Ignore" attack without moving (they can make block that only reduces damage).
I really wanna know the big difference.
Perhaps "active blocking" might be somewhat unfitting for Diablo-style gameplay. (Though if it were implemented I've absolute confidence that Blizzard could pull it off well.)
I realise that a lot of players enjoy blast-stomping through levels and monsters in a frenzy of mindless clicking, leaving blood, carnage, chaos, mayhem and destruction in their wake.
(It is a style that embodies youth, and as such is enjoyed most by the young, dare I say 'impatient', even)
At very least, a "passive system" should be introduced - for example, players could acquire and craft armour and weapons that enhance blocking ability. Again, of importance to me is the visual style - when a block is successful an appropriate animation needs to be played.
What also bothers me is the idea that every single attack executed by an enemy player or monster is a hit on my character. What that means is, "My character wasn't good enough to block - every time".
Well, seeing as Diablo 2 already had gear with enhanced block ability, we can almost be sure that will show up somehow in Diablo 3 (being such a vital stat for that particular play style).
As far as animations, you are absolutely right, it really should show you that you blocked. If anybody could pull this off, it would be Blizzard. The biggest problem I see with this idea is being surrounded. Lets say you are surrounded by a swarm of monsters, all of them smacking you. You have a pretty high block, so a lot of the attacks are getting blocked. Would it then show that you blocked EVERY move, or would it atleast show a lot of them to give you the idea that your character is blocking it up? I mean, if you didn't want out, you could get some rediculous animations, either your character is just spazzing out trying to visually block everything, or the animations end up very choppy where the animation ends up cutting into itself.
I really feel where your coming from, but I just don't know if this would work out so well, but we will just have to see. Another idea I had was, even if they did not implement a system like this, perhaps we might see a defensive ability that actually guarantees a block? It would probably be Barb specific, however you could be able to block certain projectiles or smaller spells with your shield. Just an idea.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
There are no stupid questions, just a bunch of inquisitive idiots.
The biggest problem I see with this idea is being surrounded. Lets say you are surrounded by a swarm of monsters, all of them smacking you. You have a pretty high block, so a lot of the attacks are getting blocked. Would it then show that you blocked EVERY move, or would it atleast show a lot of them to give you the idea that your character is blocking it up? I mean, if you didn't want out, you could get some rediculous animations, either your character is just spazzing out trying to visually block everything, or the animations end up very choppy where the animation ends up cutting into itself.
The first Diablo actually included blocking with animations. The warrior would put his shield up and literally meet the attacker's blade. If surrounded, the other attacks were simply registered as hits or misses as the case was.
I would think that it could be handled in a similar manner in D3, or slightly improved; while not all blocked attacks would play the animation, just between say 1 ~ 3 successful blocks could play. The artwork being different for a single block and multiple blocks.
The first Diablo actually included blocking with animations. The warrior would put his shield up and literally meet the attacker's blade. If surrounded, the other attacks were simply registered as hits or misses as the case was.
I would think that it could be handled in a similar manner in D3, or slightly improved; while not all blocked attacks would play the animation, just between say 1 ~ 3 successful blocks could play. The artwork being different for a single block and multiple blocks.
This^
Blocking animation should exist for sure, however blocking animation should not become excessive nor should it interrupt special attack animation in any way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
There are no stupid questions, just a bunch of inquisitive idiots.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have always been of the opinion that the blocking of attacks, whether they be melee, ranged or magical be implemented into any game featuring combat.
My reasoning for this is that the inability to block, negatively affects the visual style and gameplay. It removes a player skill factor, and it is also unrealistic. Allow me to elaborate;
The visual style suffers because what you see are opponents relentlessly hacking at each other with no apparent concern for their own safety - the ol' silly "swapping punches" thing. The gameplay suffers because the winner is determined entirely by who has the higher level, the best gear and the fastest clicker finger, consequently a skill factor is removed. Finally, one need only watch any professional fighting sport to realise that blocking is essential and that not doing so amounts to folly. Therefore the absence of blocking in a game is unrealistic.
Games necessarilly implement a "hit or miss" system, but unless a blocking or dodge animation is triggered on a miss, the visual style suffers terribly. (Take any RPG where one faces an opponent X levels lower, have the player opt to do nothing, and watch the enemy swing and miss, grunting endlessly while the player character stands there motionless, perhaps even with weapon sheathed)
Some games implement a "chance to block" system, but this is flawed because it does not address the visual style or skill factor issues and takes control away from the player. I believe players want to control and win a game with skill, not % chance.
Ever see a good martial arts movie? Tons of blocking. Ever see Gandalf fight the Balrog in Lord of the Rings? Blocking. Ever see Yoda absorb the force electricity bolts from the Sith Emperor in Star Wars?
Yeah. BLOCKING ROCKS THE HOUSE PEOPLE! Its hands down, err up, cool. :cool:
I'm interested to know how Blizzard intends to implement blocking in Diablo 3.
I hope it's in the game- it added another degree of strategy that most newer players did not consider when they chose what gear to use and what gear to trash. Maybe, of course, revamped somehow, more creatively, to make it more dynamic (but I don't think I would want it as a button to mash or anything).
Not this topic again.
"Active blocking" or any control on blocking = bad.
No blocking unrealistic? Sorry. Do you realize what kind of game it is? You level up, you gain stats, and things changes like this.
There are plenty of skills in this game and in any games like this one. If your concern is PvP, and that both people just hold the mouse button until one is dead, then this has nothing to do with having blocking or not.
Have you ever played any games with extensive blocking abilities instead of comparing it with....... movies? And I mean in games that work even remotely in a way like Diablo.
Let me make it short for you: its incredibly horrible. It is either useless (because it is too weak) or abused to death, and fights become mainly nothing but blocking and counter. This is an absolutely horrible way to go.
Blocking can also not be used as a reaction tool especially for close combat, since unless the combat is insanely slow, you can't react fast enough. Its a matter of luck, or just holding block forever until there is a hole to attack.
I hope you understand the insane impact this would have on the gameplay, and not in a good way. You point out at neat looking examples and talk about how it affects the "visual style", but you completely disregard anything it actually does to the gamepaly. You just assume "players must block themselves = more skill from the player = realistic = good". I'm sorry, but that way of thinking is flawed here.
So here you go. Blocking will be not unlike D2, or WoW. Random chance to block attacks. Don't expect anything shiny. They are not going to destroy the game.
A true RPG are not made to ppl compete because theres allways one OP build tha rule the other and the games dies there.
Diablo is not a true RPG because theres a too strong focus on pvping and the game mechanics are quite simple to master.
Ever play Oblivion ?
That game itself was quite good, but the combat system was so unbearably easy, and insanely boring.
The only way I could actually get some fun out of that combat system, was to simply dodge and evade attacks. Blocking felt way too easy, so I avoided it entirely.
But for those who did use the block system, basically you held block until an attack, then attacked after a successful block. This led to very repetitive and unchallenging gameplay.
I wasn't aware that the OP was presenting this suggestion as "active block". Chance to Block worked fine in Diablo II- most of the time it showed your character blocking when auto-blocking kicked in, and it takes a certain amount of wisdom to know how much to put in to Dexterity (and, conversely, how much to sacrifice for block when you could put it in to something else, like Vitality), what gear to wear if you're interested in blocking, and so on. That system was fine and simple.
Someone played on the lowest difficulty possible. If you turn the difficulty all the way up, unless your skill is 100, you'll skill be taking damage, and your blocks will often fail, causing you to stumble, as you probably know.
Anyway, block might be a good idea if they do it right. Some sort of mix between passive and active.
For block to work, it needs more.
Look at a fighting game and what makes Blocking a successful tool? There are many ways to counter it. Generally too, blocking does not block everything and there is multiple kind of blocking (generally standing or crouching).
There needs to be things that counter blocking entirely as well. Super powerful attacks that break blocking is lame - but it works. Various kinds of "throwing" attacks work.
My point? Doing this right means changing the game quite dramatically and balancing it all for it. If done even slightly work as well, it turns into crap. If only added for the sake of active blocking and adding something to the current game, its pointless.
The problem with oblivion is far beyond the block. The FPS factor (when playing with thief or mage archetype) are equally terrible and the special melee attacks are very crude. The whole gameplay of oblivion are bad.
The problem of block is that it was OP, so like any OP feature in a game ppl will abuse it. The problem is the balance and how it was implemented and not the fact that it was there.
For exemple, Jedi Knight is a game that have very similar gameplay of oblivion (though it's much more a FPS and less RPG then Oblivion) but have a block system and it works prety well.
If you stop to think a block is not more OP then a teleportation in any means.
Teleportation = Ignore attacks and move to target location.
Block = "Ignore" attack without moving (they can make block that only reduces damage).
I really wanna know the big difference.
I realise that a lot of players enjoy blast-stomping through levels and monsters in a frenzy of mindless clicking, leaving blood, carnage, chaos, mayhem and destruction in their wake.
(It is a style that embodies youth, and as such is enjoyed most by the young, dare I say 'impatient', even)
At very least, a "passive system" should be introduced - for example, players could acquire and craft armour and weapons that enhance blocking ability. Again, of importance to me is the visual style - when a block is successful an appropriate animation needs to be played.
What also bothers me is the idea that every single attack executed by an enemy player or monster is a hit on my character. What that means is, "My character wasn't good enough to block - every time".
As far as animations, you are absolutely right, it really should show you that you blocked. If anybody could pull this off, it would be Blizzard. The biggest problem I see with this idea is being surrounded. Lets say you are surrounded by a swarm of monsters, all of them smacking you. You have a pretty high block, so a lot of the attacks are getting blocked. Would it then show that you blocked EVERY move, or would it atleast show a lot of them to give you the idea that your character is blocking it up? I mean, if you didn't want out, you could get some rediculous animations, either your character is just spazzing out trying to visually block everything, or the animations end up very choppy where the animation ends up cutting into itself.
I really feel where your coming from, but I just don't know if this would work out so well, but we will just have to see. Another idea I had was, even if they did not implement a system like this, perhaps we might see a defensive ability that actually guarantees a block? It would probably be Barb specific, however you could be able to block certain projectiles or smaller spells with your shield. Just an idea.
I would think that it could be handled in a similar manner in D3, or slightly improved; while not all blocked attacks would play the animation, just between say 1 ~ 3 successful blocks could play. The artwork being different for a single block and multiple blocks.
This^
Blocking animation should exist for sure, however blocking animation should not become excessive nor should it interrupt special attack animation in any way.