Will players be satisfied with a 4 player per game cap? Personally I have more than 3 other friends who expect to play this game and I got a little sad hearing this.
With four players in the co-op there will never be all 5 classes, meaning your party misses out on valuable gameplay the 5th class could provide and also their could be potential wasted loot. Plus 4 is too boring.
Watching the gameplay videos there is easily enough room for more than 4 players in the PvE side of D3. They have 6 in PvP and it looks fine. I believe 8 players could easily fit and look fine.
Assuming the cap is true, do you feel the argument that more than 4 players gets too "chaotic and messy" or do you feel blizzard could be too lazy to balance things out with more than 4 players? Could 4 players per game limit the effectiveness of "trading" games?
Also what about PvP games. I would hope that PvP wouldn't be limited to ONLY the arena. Some of the most fun I ever had in Diablo 2 was chatting and dueling. Definitely can't do that with a 4 person limit (assuming you can even duel in non-arena).
if blizzard said more than 4 is 2 messy then more than 4 is 2 messy ^^ nuff said
they also said the more people in a party the harder mobs get ... if there were more then 4 ppl in a party players were 1 shoted by harder mobs & that wasnt fun at all
also arena .. u can make an arena where you go 1 on 1
i hope arenas will be the only pvp place or at least i hope they make that you cant go berserk on low lvls if they r in a party just like that cos that was rly annoying in d2 when high lvl went into game & just killed every1 in & left
you will probably have auction house so i wouldnt worry about trading in game
I don't want this to be a rant or argument, but would you have played D2 for so long if there was only 4 people per game and the only way to pvp was to sit in a chat room asking people for duels? It would have gotten really bored really fast. For me, joining a duel game and just chatting with others, discussing strategy, practicing strategy, showing off your gear, while new people would join and others would leave.. and one duel game would last hours if not days... that was what kept me going in D2.
PvP in any game requires a lot more than just queuing up for an instanced arena. How hard and time consuming will it be if you and your friends have to keep going to arena every time you wanted to try out new builds, new class combos, new gear? In a timed arena this could prove quite difficult when you could easily just make 1 game and practice outside the gates.
Now they could combat this by allowing you to create an "arena type game" that has no time limit, no rounds, just your stash, merchants, healers, and the arena.
What you said about a high lvl going off on a newb.. or PKers in general - Require who ever you hostile to 'confirm' before you can PvP in a non-arena game. Solves Pking and promotes dueling games outside of arena. It would also solve that one guy who likes to hostile and run out in middle of fights. No confirm, no pvp. Simple mechanic.
Monster difficulty per players wouldn't mean that 8 players = 1 shot.. They just have to adjust the percentages of everything accordingly. Increase the number of baddies, increase the fun!
I just don't want to feel that blizzard is restricting or limiting the amount of fun that can be had. 4 players per game cap when the last game had 8 is a pretty severe cut.
What? How does allowing you to simply queue up for a PvP specific arena discourage PvP? If anything it makes it easier because you know going in that there will be active PvP. I don't think they'll make you 'go anywhere' other than a person in town you talk to.
What? How does allowing you to simply queue up for a PvP specific arena discourage PvP? If anything it makes it easier because you know going in that there will be active PvP. I don't think they'll make you 'go anywhere' other than a person in town you talk to.
I didn't say discourage, but limit opportunities. We don't really know exactly how it will work yet either so I am getting ahead of my self.
I am assuming it will work like starcraft 2's battle.net 2.0 system, but with a chat lobby. You form your party outside of the game and then you can either queue up for random or create custom and invite other teams you want to arena against.
This won't feel as restricted if they allow you to make a pvp only game that doesn't have set teams, rounds, time limits etc.
Well that would probably have to be another mode entirely. Arenas base themselves around timed matches, so we probably won't see anything like that with the current system. Even though some kind of free for all, no holds barred PvP would clearly make sense for Diablo.
Lets hope there are many ways to enter " pvp arena"
Not just through queued quick match but, maybe within the game of PvE World.
We can pay a fee and enter a colluseum like place where we can test our builds
Which is different than the PvE world because all the skills are adjusted differently for PvP.
It would be nearly impossible to find builds for PvP if everyone is trying to kill you in a quick match.
To be entirely honest, from the videos it really looks like 4 people is pushing the limits of what is fun. I think 3 people looks like the optimum experience as far as having just enough going on to take up all the screen without cluttering. At four players, it's going to be very busy. I just don't see how five people could actually have fun playing co-op together without the screen becoming too crazy, the computers seizing from all the mobs and spell effects, and/or one of the players just getting bored from time to time from having nothing to do besides chase whoever happens to be running the right direction.
4 players isn't only to limit insanity on the screen, it's to make people cooperate instead of how it was in D2 where you had people soloing all over different parts of a dungeon.
Also I could be wrong, but this seems like it's just secretly another "I want to PK newbs" thread.
Hopefully now when you're in a 4 player group you'll have to stick together in order to survive (unless one of the players is above the other guys in levels and gear etc) and he insists in going to lower level areas
Well yea thats the idea. So its not like D2 where it would just be 4 (or in D2's case, 8) people doing their own thing. When the difficulty ramps up with more players, you'll need them to survive. Which also means that if they tried to balance it that well with more people, you'd probably get one shot, especially with the new health system. So not only does 4 players make it not too chaotic, but its also probably the best number in terms of balance, because you have to make it challenging for the whole group without making the monsters so strong that they just kill whoever they attack first.
i believe the fact that it limits the possible decisions is what makes it more interesting
i myself would actually prefer a 3 player cap instead
you could still play LAN type setup games (over internet but in same room)
you just play in groups
anyway the idea of picking 4 class choices and not being able to have 1 of each class expands the strategy of what you want in your party
doesnt even have to be 1 of each
could be something like 2 barbarians, a wizard, and a demon hunter
so i believe the players in game being low is a good thing, so you dont join games whereas you do pretty much nothing cuz your other party members could kill them before you could (more in games with 6 players than with games with like 3 or 4)
Also I could be wrong, but this seems like it's just secretly another "I want to PK newbs" thread.
I guess you didn't read all of my post. I never liked D2's hostile system and I discussed a simple solution.
But after reading responses I can agree with the reasoning now.
After watching a lot of d3 videos and going over them, there are many areas of the game where 8 players simply wouldn't fit because of how the dungeons / pathing are designed. I also noticed that with the exception of the "ghouls on the bridge" video where tons of them swarm the hero.. the rest of the dungeon takes places on narrow bridges and slim corridors. And in other areas that we have seen gameplay footage, the amount of enemies in an area is thin. If they were to increase the player limit they would have to almost triple the amount of enemies and things could go crazy.
But who knows we still have places we have not seen and maybe there are areas where it's non-stop chaos with swarms of things to kill.
And to Butcher who wrote "If I come across as rude and unfriendly this was not my intent and I apologize in advance if I have offended anyone with my lengthy post :)".. I'm not offended. I appreciate all feedback and I enjoy these threads. I understand how internet forums work. For some people it can be difficult to tell their side of a story without it seeming like a flame or argument.
Wait, D2 duels had strategy outside of "get godly gear, spam 1 skill"?
Lol yeah, before everybody had teleport and godly duped / bugged gear. Back when people were stacking run/walk charms instead of 20 life charms... Back when life steal worked and a melee fight would go beyond a single whirlwind, charge or dragon flight kick. D2 pvp now is a joke. You get an enigma and full charms and its a teleport who clicks first battle.
I support the 4 player cap, both for game play, and visual purposes. OP, when you mention there are 6 players in PvP and it looks fine, you're leaving out a HUGE factor. There are no monsters on the screen during PvP.
In the 2008 gameplay trailer during the Siegebreaker fight, after he dies like 75-100 skeletons appear from the gates, between that and 4 more players I couldn't even imagine the chaos that would take place on the screen..
“We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.” - Albert Einstein
Right, but that still brings up the problem of balancing the extra difficulty with allowing characters to survive a monster's attacks. The more players you have, the harder the monsters have to hit, to the point where in order to keep it challenging you have to make it so that a player in the group dies almost every time, or you can give monsters more hp, but that gets to the point where it just takes forever to kill a monster and it gets boring (unless you're all constantly hitting the same monster.)
Obviously that wouldn't be as substantial with a 5 player cap, but really we have no idea how the game is balanced, so we can only assume that Blizzard would have made it so that you could have one of each character class in a game if they could.
Think about it, when did you play with 7 other people in D2? Most likely it was when you were doing either Tristram runs, Tomb runs, Chaos runs, Baal runs, etc. And most of these games you never had to swing a weapon. You either had to follow a high level character or bot or sit in town and wait for a portal.
YaY! Not.
4 players is the perfect number. It won't be over cluttered and you'll have to be much more strategic and tactical with the party members you have. In Diablo III, it is the development team's goal to make cooperation vital. If you stray too far from your party, watch out. Gameplay will be much more enthralling, and that's what matters most.
@maka: The point I tried to make earlier is that 4 players is probably already going to be pushing the reasonableness. Sometimes "just adding one more" is a lot, like with chromosomes or treason indictments. "Just one" more of either of those will have a massive impact on a person. I don't want to get caught up in the metaphor, but the point is that adding another player would likely have a MUCH larger impact on the game than most people think it would.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Will players be satisfied with a 4 player per game cap? Personally I have more than 3 other friends who expect to play this game and I got a little sad hearing this.
With four players in the co-op there will never be all 5 classes, meaning your party misses out on valuable gameplay the 5th class could provide and also their could be potential wasted loot. Plus 4 is too boring.
Watching the gameplay videos there is easily enough room for more than 4 players in the PvE side of D3. They have 6 in PvP and it looks fine. I believe 8 players could easily fit and look fine.
Assuming the cap is true, do you feel the argument that more than 4 players gets too "chaotic and messy" or do you feel blizzard could be too lazy to balance things out with more than 4 players? Could 4 players per game limit the effectiveness of "trading" games?
Also what about PvP games. I would hope that PvP wouldn't be limited to ONLY the arena. Some of the most fun I ever had in Diablo 2 was chatting and dueling. Definitely can't do that with a 4 person limit (assuming you can even duel in non-arena).
I don't want this to be a rant or argument, but would you have played D2 for so long if there was only 4 people per game and the only way to pvp was to sit in a chat room asking people for duels? It would have gotten really bored really fast. For me, joining a duel game and just chatting with others, discussing strategy, practicing strategy, showing off your gear, while new people would join and others would leave.. and one duel game would last hours if not days... that was what kept me going in D2.
PvP in any game requires a lot more than just queuing up for an instanced arena. How hard and time consuming will it be if you and your friends have to keep going to arena every time you wanted to try out new builds, new class combos, new gear? In a timed arena this could prove quite difficult when you could easily just make 1 game and practice outside the gates.
Now they could combat this by allowing you to create an "arena type game" that has no time limit, no rounds, just your stash, merchants, healers, and the arena.
What you said about a high lvl going off on a newb.. or PKers in general - Require who ever you hostile to 'confirm' before you can PvP in a non-arena game. Solves Pking and promotes dueling games outside of arena. It would also solve that one guy who likes to hostile and run out in middle of fights. No confirm, no pvp. Simple mechanic.
Monster difficulty per players wouldn't mean that 8 players = 1 shot.. They just have to adjust the percentages of everything accordingly. Increase the number of baddies, increase the fun!
I just don't want to feel that blizzard is restricting or limiting the amount of fun that can be had. 4 players per game cap when the last game had 8 is a pretty severe cut.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
I didn't say discourage, but limit opportunities. We don't really know exactly how it will work yet either so I am getting ahead of my self.
I am assuming it will work like starcraft 2's battle.net 2.0 system, but with a chat lobby. You form your party outside of the game and then you can either queue up for random or create custom and invite other teams you want to arena against.
This won't feel as restricted if they allow you to make a pvp only game that doesn't have set teams, rounds, time limits etc.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
but u can see at the videos, its jst too much at the screen.. 8 is impossible
5 would be a nice number, as it covers all classes.. but i know blizz tested that and refused
Wait, D2 duels had strategy outside of "get godly gear, spam 1 skill"?
Not just through queued quick match but, maybe within the game of PvE World.
We can pay a fee and enter a colluseum like place where we can test our builds
Which is different than the PvE world because all the skills are adjusted differently for PvP.
It would be nearly impossible to find builds for PvP if everyone is trying to kill you in a quick match.
Also I could be wrong, but this seems like it's just secretly another "I want to PK newbs" thread.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
i myself would actually prefer a 3 player cap instead
you could still play LAN type setup games (over internet but in same room)
you just play in groups
anyway the idea of picking 4 class choices and not being able to have 1 of each class expands the strategy of what you want in your party
doesnt even have to be 1 of each
could be something like 2 barbarians, a wizard, and a demon hunter
so i believe the players in game being low is a good thing, so you dont join games whereas you do pretty much nothing cuz your other party members could kill them before you could (more in games with 6 players than with games with like 3 or 4)
Be my Buddy =^.^=
I guess you didn't read all of my post. I never liked D2's hostile system and I discussed a simple solution.
But after reading responses I can agree with the reasoning now.
After watching a lot of d3 videos and going over them, there are many areas of the game where 8 players simply wouldn't fit because of how the dungeons / pathing are designed. I also noticed that with the exception of the "ghouls on the bridge" video where tons of them swarm the hero.. the rest of the dungeon takes places on narrow bridges and slim corridors. And in other areas that we have seen gameplay footage, the amount of enemies in an area is thin. If they were to increase the player limit they would have to almost triple the amount of enemies and things could go crazy.
But who knows we still have places we have not seen and maybe there are areas where it's non-stop chaos with swarms of things to kill.
And to Butcher who wrote "If I come across as rude and unfriendly this was not my intent and I apologize in advance if I have offended anyone with my lengthy post :)".. I'm not offended. I appreciate all feedback and I enjoy these threads. I understand how internet forums work. For some people it can be difficult to tell their side of a story without it seeming like a flame or argument.
People are becoming increasingly stupid.
Lol yeah, before everybody had teleport and godly duped / bugged gear. Back when people were stacking run/walk charms instead of 20 life charms... Back when life steal worked and a melee fight would go beyond a single whirlwind, charge or dragon flight kick. D2 pvp now is a joke. You get an enigma and full charms and its a teleport who clicks first battle.
In the 2008 gameplay trailer during the Siegebreaker fight, after he dies like 75-100 skeletons appear from the gates, between that and 4 more players I couldn't even imagine the chaos that would take place on the screen..
Obviously that wouldn't be as substantial with a 5 player cap, but really we have no idea how the game is balanced, so we can only assume that Blizzard would have made it so that you could have one of each character class in a game if they could.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
YaY! Not.
4 players is the perfect number. It won't be over cluttered and you'll have to be much more strategic and tactical with the party members you have. In Diablo III, it is the development team's goal to make cooperation vital. If you stray too far from your party, watch out. Gameplay will be much more enthralling, and that's what matters most.