" Perhaps they should just allow you to fully outfit your characters within the first month of playing so that you'll get bored with the game and stop playing then?"
Why do people keep repeating this above statement all the time? People were able to finish gearing their characters in Diablo II comparatively easily, they didn't simply quit afterwards, but started over again with new characters.
If you have to stop people from being able to progress with their characters in order to keep them playing, you're doing something horribly wrong.
I asked the simple question: How many actual full hours of grinding rifts do you think is acceptable between reasonable upgrades?
So far the only answer I've seen is that months between upgrades is an acceptable timeframe. I disagree.
You seem to be acting dense on purpose. It clearly depends on your existing gear. If you're just 70 you're probably going to find a significant upgrade every hour for a while. If you're a T6-capable character you'll probably go weeks or months between significant upgrades.
Because you keep referencing timeframe but not acknowledging gear level, you're implying that, at all gear levels, there should be X hours between upgrades. Any Diablo "fan" knows that's simply not how it works. Finding an 8/8/20 Vamp Gaze was a lot harder than finding a 6/6/15 Vamp Gaze. Most people found dozens of the "mediocre" Vamp Gazes for every "perfect" (or near-perfect) one they found. That is how randomly-generated loot works.
Trying to slap a "you get an item every X hours" label on the situation just doesn't work. If your gear is in the 99th percentile then there's no way you're going to see many upgrades. And it's reasonable to say that someone in the 90th percentile is going to see fewer upgrades than someone in the 75th percentile. You do understand that, right?
EDIT
We could take this to an absurd level. My DH is almost level 68 as I type this. So far he's found 17 total Marquise gems. Only one of those 17 has been an Emerald. He has found at least three of every other type. Maybe I should demand to know "How many hours between Marquise Emeralds is acceptable?" Then again, that's a pompous, douchey, question to ask because it's based on the premise that RNG should NEVER EVER SCREW ME OVER BECAUSE I AM A SPECIAL SNOWFLAKE.
Quote from WD Jesus I asked the simple question: How many actual full hours of grinding rifts do you think is acceptable between reasonable upgrades?
So far the only answer I've seen is that months between upgrades is an acceptable timeframe. I disagree.
You seem to be acting dense on purpose.
This is a perfect fit with my first impressions of this forum. Are insults really helpful to a meaningful dialogue?
I asked this question the way I did because the way in which it's answered shows a point where someone may not be willing to invest the time anymore. It ties the math to the actual human experience of playing the game. If you reach a point with your character where you haven't seen a reasonable upgrade in 100 hours would you be ok with that? How about 200 hours? At what point does it become more of a chore than fun? At what point do you just stop playing?
I asked this question the way I did because the way in which it's answered shows a point where someone may not be willing to invest the time anymore. It ties the math to the actual human experience of playing the game. If you reach a point with your character where you haven't seen a reasonable upgrade in 100 hours would you be ok with that? How about 200 hours? At what point does it become more of a chore than fun? At what point do you just stop playing?
Drop tinkering will sadly never solve this problem. If your gear is good enough, you will need to play 1000000 hours to hope for a 0.1% upgrade. That's what ladder seasons are for.
I asked this question the way I did because the way in which it's answered shows a point where someone may not be willing to invest the time anymore. It ties the math to the actual human experience of playing the game. If you reach a point with your character where you haven't seen a reasonable upgrade in 100 hours would you be ok with that? How about 200 hours? At what point does it become more of a chore than fun? At what point do you just stop playing?
Drop tinkering will sadly never solve this problem. That's what ladder seasons are for.
In my opinion, tinkering won't fix any of the loot problems. The system needs a full overhaul from A to Z.
I asked this question the way I did because the way in which it's answered shows a point where someone may not be willing to invest the time anymore. It ties the math to the actual human experience of playing the game. If you reach a point with your character where you haven't seen a reasonable upgrade in 100 hours would you be ok with that? How about 200 hours? At what point does it become more of a chore than fun? At what point do you just stop playing?
Drop tinkering will sadly never solve this problem. That's what ladder seasons are for.
In my opinion, tinkering won't fix any of the loot problems. The system needs a full overhaul from A to Z.
No overhaul will solve the problem, as long as items are permanent. You are asking for the mathematically impossible. Tiered drops can only delay the inevitable for a small time, and is generally hated, as seen by 1.0. If you are suggesting a system where items will randomly break, I don't think that goes well with the player base.
This is a perfect fit with my first impressions of this forum. Are insults really helpful to a meaningful dialogue?
I asked this question the way I did because the way in which it's answered shows a point where someone may not be willing to invest the time anymore. It ties the math to the actual human experience of playing the game. If you reach a point with your character where you haven't seen a reasonable upgrade in 100 hours would you be ok with that? How about 200 hours? At what point does it become more of a chore than fun? At what point do you just stop playing?
But you're asking a false question to begin with, which is why I said you're being dense (and argumentative) on purpose.
There are max rolls on gear. Therefore, as your gear gets better, upgrades are going to become more rare. It's not very difficult to understand, yet you keep insinuating that if you don't find an upgrade every X hours that the game has "lost its fun" or some such. If you have a bunch of near-perfect gear, that's the reality of having such good gear.
So, really, it's INEVITABLE that eventually you go 200 or 500 hours without an "upgrade." As such, what you're arguing is that eventually Diablo will become not-fun because of lack of upgrades. And? It happened in D2 too. The AVERAGE person didn't play D2 for 10 years, or 5 years. What does that matter, though? ARPGs aren't designed to have an infinite lifespan for the average player.
An infinitely more important question is "Did I have fun while I played the game?" not the "THE GAME SHOULD HAVE LASTED 25,000 HOURS BUT GODDAMN GEAR IS HARD TO FIND" exercise in futility that you're trying to put us through.
Aside from constantly adding new tiers of gear (in the style of an MMORPG) how exactly do you have constant, linear, gear progression for the life of a game? I'd love to hear how you'd do it because I don't think it's possible and I think that your whole line of logic here is just faulty to begin with. Even with MMORPGs you don't have linear gear progression as there tends to be a rush of new gear at the beginning of a tier that tapers off slowly towards the end of the tier then repeats. Meaning, even with new tiers of gear, you'll still find that at one point you're finding upgrades faster than at another point.
Like I said, have live span on gears. Since your gear constantly degrades, you will constantly find upgrades. That way, the OP will be happy. If you think about it, MMORPG's that always introduce better gear in very frequent intervals is essentially doing the same thing, no?
Quote from WD Jesus I asked the simple question: How many actual full hours of grinding rifts do you think is acceptable between reasonable upgrades?
So far the only answer I've seen is that months between upgrades is an acceptable timeframe. I disagree.
You seem to be acting dense on purpose.
This is a perfect fit with my first impressions of this forum. Are insults really helpful to a meaningful dialogue?
I asked this question the way I did because the way in which it's answered shows a point where someone may not be willing to invest the time anymore. It ties the math to the actual human experience of playing the game. If you reach a point with your character where you haven't seen a reasonable upgrade in 100 hours would you be ok with that? How about 200 hours? At what point does it become more of a chore than fun? At what point do you just stop playing?
I'd like to point out that Shaggy just delivered you a well thought, well written post and you appear to have completely disregarded it because of that one line. That's kind of sad.
Also, if you reach the point where you've invested 100-200 hours into a game, it doesn't NEED to be fun anymore. If it is still fun, then great! If it's not, well, you got your money's worth. Some $50-60 games last 3-4 hours before they get old. Do we really need to complain about the longevity of Diablo 3?
Like I said, have live span on gears. Since your gear constantly degrades, you will constantly find upgrades. That way, the OP will be happy. If you think about it, MMORPG's that always introduce better gear in very frequent intervals is essentially doing the same thing, no?
But that doesn't solve much. It trades one form of burnout for another.
Yes, people who get near-max gear will burn out. But, by the same breath, making people run on a treadmill because eventually their existing gear decays will cause other people to burnout. Imagine how infuriating it would be if your near-perfect SoH decayed and you didn't have an appropriate replacement. How many people are really going to want that kind of system in ANY game? These are games, afterall, and not professions. There is no way the average gamer, or even the average ARPG fan, would embrace that kind of system.
Most of us are looking to improve our gear and slowly move towards that "max" scenario. We're not looking for the game to, more or less, delete our existing items after a certain amount of time has passed. I get what you're suggesting but I don't think that creating a "three steps forward, two steps backwards" mechanic would really add anything to the game. In fact, I think it would create MORE frustration than what WD Jesus is complaining about. In my opinion, having some kind of "gear decay" would be vastly less desirable than having a game where your gear progression slows as your gear improves.
This whole train of thought revolves around the idea that games should have infinite duration and that's something i roundly reject. D3 doesn't need to last for a decade. It just needs to be a fun game to play while it lasts. Instead of trying to work out how to make the game fun in 2020 they should be thinking about how to make it fun in 2014 and 2015.
But that doesn't solve much. It trades one form of burnout for another.
I was being sarcastic. Having gears that break will sit very poorly with the player base, and introducing larger and larger numbers will burn people out just as well.
This is a loot finding game and at one point it will become real hard to find upgrades.
All loot finding games have this issue and no true way around. The best you can is to do account wipes but people do not like that so the Ladder was born which is basically an account wipe.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On Strike and supporting Fallout 4 Mod Makers
Some fallout 4 mod makers have had their mods stolen and uploaded and downloaded on Bethesda's site for the Xbox One.
Like I said, have live span on gears. Since your gear constantly degrades, you will constantly find upgrades. That way, the OP will be happy. If you think about it, MMORPG's that always introduce better gear in very frequent intervals is essentially doing the same thing, no?
That idea is HORRIBLE!!!!!! The OP can cry all he wants...if he plays more than maybe he will getz da l00tz. He can get his pay 2 play mindset and gtfo!! GRIND YOU CRY BABY GRIND!!!!
No game exists in a perfect state. The only way for any thing to become better is to question its current paradigm, believing that the way a thing is, is the way it ought to be, is worthless and as such has no place in constructive criticism.
No game exists in a perfect state. The only way for any thing to become better is to question its current paradigm, believing that the way a thing is, is the way it ought to be, is worthless and as such has no place in constructive criticism.
See you've just insulted everyone here, who wants this game to do good, who want this game to succeed, and who think it has already been a success. The game needs work no denying that, It definitely needs some more rng counters, but it is also a very good game in a very good state ,and denying that is also very stupid. Just because we like Blizzard doesn't mean we suck their cocks day in day out. I love Blizzard and all their games, I want them to keep doing what they do redefine the genre and push it forward. You hating us because we all have apparently been brain washed is also stupid. Please keep stupid to a minimum and continue on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
I get a lot of good items with crappy rolls, but I also don't get the items I want.
I really feel like there is a sort of 'tier' system you have to move through. I notice that I generally get multiple usable items in a row rather than one every few, then another every few. Like, I'll get 10-20 2 handers, not class related (crossbow, barb belt), just overall not good (blackthorns with bad rolls), then in the next 3-5 I'll get two good items.
I got 2 Chantodo's sources within a day from each other, but I didn't get the wand until a week later maybe.
i can't find a tal rasha's anything, but I have Vyr pants that I got near when I got lacuni bracers.
But it really feels like the shitty items I get are getting better overall.
Why do people keep repeating this above statement all the time? People were able to finish gearing their characters in Diablo II comparatively easily, they didn't simply quit afterwards, but started over again with new characters.
If you have to stop people from being able to progress with their characters in order to keep them playing, you're doing something horribly wrong.
Because you keep referencing timeframe but not acknowledging gear level, you're implying that, at all gear levels, there should be X hours between upgrades. Any Diablo "fan" knows that's simply not how it works. Finding an 8/8/20 Vamp Gaze was a lot harder than finding a 6/6/15 Vamp Gaze. Most people found dozens of the "mediocre" Vamp Gazes for every "perfect" (or near-perfect) one they found. That is how randomly-generated loot works.
Trying to slap a "you get an item every X hours" label on the situation just doesn't work. If your gear is in the 99th percentile then there's no way you're going to see many upgrades. And it's reasonable to say that someone in the 90th percentile is going to see fewer upgrades than someone in the 75th percentile. You do understand that, right?
EDIT
We could take this to an absurd level. My DH is almost level 68 as I type this. So far he's found 17 total Marquise gems. Only one of those 17 has been an Emerald. He has found at least three of every other type. Maybe I should demand to know "How many hours between Marquise Emeralds is acceptable?" Then again, that's a pompous, douchey, question to ask because it's based on the premise that RNG should NEVER EVER SCREW ME OVER BECAUSE I AM A SPECIAL SNOWFLAKE.
I asked this question the way I did because the way in which it's answered shows a point where someone may not be willing to invest the time anymore. It ties the math to the actual human experience of playing the game. If you reach a point with your character where you haven't seen a reasonable upgrade in 100 hours would you be ok with that? How about 200 hours? At what point does it become more of a chore than fun? At what point do you just stop playing?
Drop tinkering will sadly never solve this problem. If your gear is good enough, you will need to play 1000000 hours to hope for a 0.1% upgrade. That's what ladder seasons are for.
No overhaul will solve the problem, as long as items are permanent. You are asking for the mathematically impossible. Tiered drops can only delay the inevitable for a small time, and is generally hated, as seen by 1.0. If you are suggesting a system where items will randomly break, I don't think that goes well with the player base.
There are max rolls on gear. Therefore, as your gear gets better, upgrades are going to become more rare. It's not very difficult to understand, yet you keep insinuating that if you don't find an upgrade every X hours that the game has "lost its fun" or some such. If you have a bunch of near-perfect gear, that's the reality of having such good gear.
So, really, it's INEVITABLE that eventually you go 200 or 500 hours without an "upgrade." As such, what you're arguing is that eventually Diablo will become not-fun because of lack of upgrades. And? It happened in D2 too. The AVERAGE person didn't play D2 for 10 years, or 5 years. What does that matter, though? ARPGs aren't designed to have an infinite lifespan for the average player.
An infinitely more important question is "Did I have fun while I played the game?" not the "THE GAME SHOULD HAVE LASTED 25,000 HOURS BUT GODDAMN GEAR IS HARD TO FIND" exercise in futility that you're trying to put us through.
Aside from constantly adding new tiers of gear (in the style of an MMORPG) how exactly do you have constant, linear, gear progression for the life of a game? I'd love to hear how you'd do it because I don't think it's possible and I think that your whole line of logic here is just faulty to begin with. Even with MMORPGs you don't have linear gear progression as there tends to be a rush of new gear at the beginning of a tier that tapers off slowly towards the end of the tier then repeats. Meaning, even with new tiers of gear, you'll still find that at one point you're finding upgrades faster than at another point.
Like I said, have live span on gears. Since your gear constantly degrades, you will constantly find upgrades. That way, the OP will be happy. If you think about it, MMORPG's that always introduce better gear in very frequent intervals is essentially doing the same thing, no?
Also, if you reach the point where you've invested 100-200 hours into a game, it doesn't NEED to be fun anymore. If it is still fun, then great! If it's not, well, you got your money's worth. Some $50-60 games last 3-4 hours before they get old. Do we really need to complain about the longevity of Diablo 3?
Yes, people who get near-max gear will burn out. But, by the same breath, making people run on a treadmill because eventually their existing gear decays will cause other people to burnout. Imagine how infuriating it would be if your near-perfect SoH decayed and you didn't have an appropriate replacement. How many people are really going to want that kind of system in ANY game? These are games, afterall, and not professions. There is no way the average gamer, or even the average ARPG fan, would embrace that kind of system.
Most of us are looking to improve our gear and slowly move towards that "max" scenario. We're not looking for the game to, more or less, delete our existing items after a certain amount of time has passed. I get what you're suggesting but I don't think that creating a "three steps forward, two steps backwards" mechanic would really add anything to the game. In fact, I think it would create MORE frustration than what WD Jesus is complaining about. In my opinion, having some kind of "gear decay" would be vastly less desirable than having a game where your gear progression slows as your gear improves.
This whole train of thought revolves around the idea that games should have infinite duration and that's something i roundly reject. D3 doesn't need to last for a decade. It just needs to be a fun game to play while it lasts. Instead of trying to work out how to make the game fun in 2020 they should be thinking about how to make it fun in 2014 and 2015.
EDIT
Sarcasm radar is broken. Derp!
I was being sarcastic. Having gears that break will sit very poorly with the player base, and introducing larger and larger numbers will burn people out just as well.
All loot finding games have this issue and no true way around. The best you can is to do account wipes but people do not like that so the Ladder was born which is basically an account wipe.
I can progress into T1 easily with rares and some random buffet of legendaries the game gives me...
I can't, however, play the game like I want with the EQ set or Tal's Set or any other set for that matter.
The question is: At what point can I play the build I WANT rather than the one that is given to me?
The answer to that question should scare most....but MOST don't care or are lucky with their drops.
It is impossible to balance RNG...one can simply put some controls on her to keep her going in the right direction.
Once Blizzard understands this, a lot of us will be happier...If Blizzard ever understands this.
No game exists in a perfect state. The only way for any thing to become better is to question its current paradigm, believing that the way a thing is, is the way it ought to be, is worthless and as such has no place in constructive criticism.
I really feel like there is a sort of 'tier' system you have to move through. I notice that I generally get multiple usable items in a row rather than one every few, then another every few. Like, I'll get 10-20 2 handers, not class related (crossbow, barb belt), just overall not good (blackthorns with bad rolls), then in the next 3-5 I'll get two good items.
I got 2 Chantodo's sources within a day from each other, but I didn't get the wand until a week later maybe.
i can't find a tal rasha's anything, but I have Vyr pants that I got near when I got lacuni bracers.
But it really feels like the shitty items I get are getting better overall.