So, according to a tweet, Source, Diablo 3 is a 4-player co-op game.
That really does solidify the amount of players in a game, doesn't it? This implies that the arenas will have to be scheduled outside of the normal PvE world (I'm assuming with "queues" you can create, or PvP-specific rooms).
I'm rather okay with this, strangely enough. While I enjoy gaming with my friends (the amount accrued over the various games I've played being quite high), this cap seems moderately reasonable based on the amount of action on-screen. It seems to allow for players to not get lost in the action, while still being able to play with friends.
Thoughts?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
------------------------------------------- Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything.
-------------------------------------------
This, to me, is the same thing as removing rushing from the game.
In the end what it does is, when I want to play, I'll actually easily find proper games. 4 players (not too many, not too spammy, 8 players is just too much unless they were really a lot more monsters), not unlike the removal of rushing which means players will be doing more normal games and actually playing the game up to the top, instead of abusing everything.
In other words, it means more people will play "normally", and it means I'm happier for it.
This, to me, is the same thing as removing rushing from the game.
In the end what it does is, when I want to play, I'll actually easily find proper games. 4 players (not too many, not too spammy, 8 players is just too much unless they were really a lot more monsters), not unlike the removal of rushing which means players will be doing more normal games and actually playing the game up to the top, instead of abusing everything.
In other words, it means more people will play "normally", and it means I'm happier for it.
will have to say i had the exact same thoughts when i first heared "4 player games" and "if you don't stick together, you die". removing rushes is a blessing, since more people will be actually playing the game instead leeching XP having you do everything while they sit back till they're high level.
on the Arena part, i'm guessing it's going to be pretty much like the matchmaking system in Starcraft II. I like the system, even though i'm not as good in Starcraft
I still think 5 players is best then you can have 1 of each class.
And what happens with each expansion? They increase the player cap per game by the # of expansion classes in each?
Your logic makes no sense... especially because the odds of getting 1 of each class unless you actually boot people for being the wrong class... is very slim.
I hope having only 4 people in the game will make it harder :D. I mean looking at the Siegebreaker boss thing, and ONLY HAVING 4 PEOPLE to fight THAT. SOUNDS AWESOME!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life is only another stage of death, in fearing death you can not live life to the fullest. Some of the world's greatest feats were accomplished by people not smart enough to know they were impossible.
4 players sounds good to me. I kind of prefer the chaos more, and I think 6 would feel a little better but I can live with 4. I hope it makes the game more difficult.
Because each class brings a different way to deal with monsters to the table? Why is it important for the game to have multiplayer at all? What so you can play with your friends? PFFT!
Because each class brings a different way to deal with monsters to the table? Why is it important for the game to have multiplayer at all? What so you can play with your friends? PFFT!
But you can finish hell on single player, so obviously what each class brings to the table is enough to complete the game. There is no necessity to have one of each class. Even in D2 with an 8 player game, you barely ever saw one of each of the 7 classes in that game, but everyone did fine.
On the other hand, I would still like maybe 5 or 6 max players in a game because 4 just seems too low for me. You would obviously have the option of restricting the number of players that can join your game if you prefer it that way, but to restrict the max number to such a low number isn't a good move in my opinion.
Yea, 4 seems low, but considering the massive change in how many SFX theres going to be on the screen at once its probably for the better. If they found that more than 4 was viable, I'm sure they would raise it, but they probably just did a bunch of different amounts of characters in one game and 4 ended up being the magic number.
Performance is not the only reason why you would want a lower cap. More co-operation and higher importance of each member is examples of other reasons.
Yea those are all good reasons, but I was talking more about simply the ability to understand whats going on during the game as opposed to performance.
That really does solidify the amount of players in a game, doesn't it? This implies that the arenas will have to be scheduled outside of the normal PvE world (I'm assuming with "queues" you can create, or PvP-specific rooms).
I'm rather okay with this, strangely enough. While I enjoy gaming with my friends (the amount accrued over the various games I've played being quite high), this cap seems moderately reasonable based on the amount of action on-screen. It seems to allow for players to not get lost in the action, while still being able to play with friends.
Thoughts?
-------------------------------------------
Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything.
-------------------------------------------
In the end what it does is, when I want to play, I'll actually easily find proper games. 4 players (not too many, not too spammy, 8 players is just too much unless they were really a lot more monsters), not unlike the removal of rushing which means players will be doing more normal games and actually playing the game up to the top, instead of abusing everything.
In other words, it means more people will play "normally", and it means I'm happier for it.
will have to say i had the exact same thoughts when i first heared "4 player games" and "if you don't stick together, you die". removing rushes is a blessing, since more people will be actually playing the game instead leeching XP having you do everything while they sit back till they're high level.
on the Arena part, i'm guessing it's going to be pretty much like the matchmaking system in Starcraft II. I like the system, even though i'm not as good in Starcraft
And what happens with each expansion? They increase the player cap per game by the # of expansion classes in each?
Your logic makes no sense... especially because the odds of getting 1 of each class unless you actually boot people for being the wrong class... is very slim.
On the other hand, I would still like maybe 5 or 6 max players in a game because 4 just seems too low for me. You would obviously have the option of restricting the number of players that can join your game if you prefer it that way, but to restrict the max number to such a low number isn't a good move in my opinion.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
Yea those are all good reasons, but I was talking more about simply the ability to understand whats going on during the game as opposed to performance.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat