Diablo
Diablo II
Jay Wilson wouldn't even have a job right now if it weren't for the above ^^
This is a discussion about professionalism, not titles associated with their name.
Bad job trying to turn the topic elsewhere.
After saying those words to Dave, the man who brought us our passion, you will never be widely accepted, Jay. Your PR excuses cannot hide your aggressive hateful nature.
oh shut up.. while what brevik said sounded professional, it was a HUGE insult to the entire team.
jays response was no doubt unprofessional.. but heres an idea, you go put your heart and soul into something that means the world to you for 4 years, then when it's not doing so hot some other guy basically says your team is incompetent and didn't have a chance because all the talent left..
see how you react.
god people are retarded.
what he said was unprofessional, but was human, and he apologized as he should have.
water under the bridge, grow up.
For someone who is very bad at reading between the lines, you're sure insisting that others do it so well.
1. Dave was ASKED how he felt. And if you watched the interview at all you should be able to tell that the interviewer was trying VERY hard to get him to be a lot nastier. So yes, Dave was honest and yet professional, no other way to see that.
2. Jay reacted like a small child. Not exactly the type of personality that should be in his position in the first place. Human or not, when you're the game director of a franchise as popular as Diablo, working for a company as prolific as Blizzard, you should have a better temperament than that, or be smarter, but probably both.
3. His "heartfelt" "apology" was, I can guarantee you, a direct result of Mike Morhaime, or some other Blizzard higher-up, dragging Jay's ass into his office and saying "Look dude, you fucked up, go fix this and save some face", which he then tried to do. I.e. he only said those things because it's now plastered all over the internet.
"Nice" has nothing to do with it. This was one of the most startlingly unprofessional moments from someone in a position like his in the history of corporate business. Did Bill Gates show up at Steve Jobs funeral and say "Fuck that loser." No, I don't think so. Jay is either an outright asshole, or just that stupid. He has a history of flagrantly bad PR decisions, and this just highlights that in a very public, very embarrassing way. Sorry, but you can't shoot off your mouth like that when you're the Game Director at the most successful video game software company to date. No excuses.
My group is looking for one more player, specifically a devoted Wizard to join our group in clearing the last part of Hell and starting in Inferno. Currently we have a Barbarian, a Monk and a Witchdoctor, and are all 58-60.
We usually run 4-6 hours a night together, starting at 7-8CST. PM me if interested, we are very laid back, but are good about sharing gear and planning ahead as a group (i.e. don't wipe often).
I agree except for the "powerhouse of a class" part. I felt like it was the weakest class by far in the beta. As of right now, I plan to never roll one until I'm completely done and bored with every other class, aka never.
I'd definitely suggest replacing Vengeance with Cull the Weak or Sharpshooter (for offense) or Brooding for Survivability.
I'd also recommend taking just about any other multishot rune. Discipline isn't all that necessary when your two Discipline skills are so low cost and situational. Fire at Will or Full Broadside would be much better runes in my opinion.
P.S. whoever said Blizzard has been quoted as saying it's easier to solo Inferno is full of it. They said VERY recently that it was slightly easier in a group play.
In the past, though not recently, they said they wanted sets to be more of an end-game thing than they were in Diablo II, that's all I remember them saying specifically in regards to that. On the official game guide, however, the only ones currently there are pretty low level stuff. As to the rest of your questions, we won't really know until they release specifics on them, which won't be until post-launch.
I agree that shields should be in the rotation of skills. For a series that has always had them, there are certainly not many skill that support them. None in Diablo I or III thus far, and only the Paladin had shield skills in Diablo II, and only 2 skills at that. I think there should be a skill that definitely supports shield play. Why not? Lots of the skills support specific weapon types, so why not a shield as well? Don't really describe a spell relfect skills as "necessary", however.
I was responding to the general thread, and including a response to what you said as well, but thanks for making a poor attempt at flaming me to invalidate what I said.
Nevertheless,
Hell was hard. Sorry, but if you think it isn't then you've never played the game. Hell in 1.0 Classic wasn't that bad, but when they basically re-rolled the entire difficulty in 1.09~, etc by adding a ton of monster defense and Immunities, it became hard, period. If you're the kind of player that has only ever experienced it by getting rushed through the game and throwing on godly items then you have no real perspective on what I'm talking about, and if you aren't, but still insist that it's easy, then I'm fairly convinced you don't know what you're talking about in general. The fact is, that a normal character who hits hell in a timely manner and with non-godly-inherited items will have their asses handed to them by even the most normal of hell mobs. They hit hard. They're hard to hit as a melee character, etc. Sorry, that's just the way it is.
As to your insistence that the Diablo III skill system isn't any better: you've either not played both games, not played Diablo III at all, or are just a bad judge of game mechanics because even the most inexperienced of gamers should pretty quickly realize that Diablo III's is pretty superior is just about every conceivable way. That they are both "linear" is not the point, nor was it ever the point.
1. Diablo III has working resource systems that support their respective skill sets.
2. Diablo II requires you to invest 20 points, therefore levels, to make a skill viable. So a fifth of your character's time in the game revolves around one skill.
Sorry, but that's pretty clear cut. And the fact that you were required to make your way through other skills via permanent skill point allocation further reinforces that conclusion.
As to skill builds, I can see how they'll work based on beta play. Is it the whole picture? No. But have I seen any glaring issues like ones that persisted in Diablo II for literally years without being fixed? No. That tells me that logically, with as many choices as we have in skills in runes, there will be exponentially more viable builds in Diablo III than in Diablo II, yet another bullet point for why the skill system is superior.
Oh and btw, well-formed arguments =/= rambling just because they show you you're wrong.
almost everybody should be good at it and some people should excel. Even at university, if most the group fails an item in a test, the item is removed from the test.
If this is the standard we hold games to, then nearly every game that's not released by Popcap is a failure. Certainly every other blizzard game is a massive failure if judged by that standard. Shouldn't we rather be looking at whether or not most people are having fun with the game? Being good at a game is not a necessary part of having fun with it (look at magicka for instance). I'm sure people in bronze league still have fun with sc2, even though they're absolutely terrible. The same can be said for most people playing WoW.
I can see that. I think a good game is pretty fun for ~95% of its players, and hard to master for ~90% of them. I think some of the predictions on these forums that only 1% of people will make it through inferno is a serious miscalculation. If that were even close to true I'd say the game was too hard. But on the other hand, if 100% of everyone who plays it is a master at it it's obviously balanced too far in the other direction.
I think our best conclusion at this point is to take Blizzard at their word:
Everyone, even new-to-RPGers will find Normal only moderately challenging. The real challenge starts at nightmare, where it gets ramped up considerably. Hell will then be yet another new horizon of hardness, and Inferno will challenge even the best. Obviously people who put a lot of time into video games and/or have considerable experience with this genre in particular or are part of a good group will probably have less trouble than those who aren't and don't. If all of that happens, then I'll say it's a pretty well made and balanced game as far as difficulty and learning curve.
what I meant was how many different ww builds will there be? what game doesnt have a linear progression?
d3 will last until d4 is released just as d2 has done. and the part about "if" is kinda hard for me to deal with. Ive been following the creation of d3 since pretty much the beginning and I know that it is everything d2 was and could ever dream to become. d2 has been in our heart for so many years, but its time to say goodbye.
Tto all of u out there who wants d2 back. spend a little time learning about d3 and u'll see that it is supperior.
I understood that, but what I'm saying is that if it would turn out in the same way as in D2, then you won't be seeing WW barbarians because in the long run, their build won't be viable, the only real difference between the 2 games are that in D2 you made a build and you had to commit fully to it, in D3 you can alter your build.
I don't want D2 back, I've done everything in that game atleast once,
I do however expect its successor to be just as good or better.
I definitly dont think D3 is superior to D2, they actually removed a really good system from D2 rather than build and improve it(The runes + runewords). It'll still be a fun game tho so don't worry.
Why won't you see a WW barbarian? You can't even tangibly debate that yet as we haven't had the skill in our hands as of yet. The skill looks plenty viable to me, however. But if you're suggesting that someone won't be able to use just a single skill, then you're both right, and disproving your own point. In fact, if the game is designed correctly, you shouldn't be able to just use one skill. That's the beauty of having a couple dozen skills that work for each class, we don't have to be one-hit wonders like in Diablo II.
Diablo III's skill system >>>>>>>>>>>> Diablo II's skill system.
How is Diablo III not superior? In every way? The skill system and proper design of resource systems alone is enough for me to say that it's light-years beyond. Nostalgia is not a factor here, the fact is that this game is better designed. Diablo II is a great game, and was ground-breaking... ten years ago. But it has also always been in a constant state of broken. From one patch to the next entire builds became unviable or just outright broken. In almost every major patch, I can think of at least one popular build that was based around things being bugged, such as the Iron Maiden Blood Golem Necro that ruled D2 Classic for quite a while.
Runewords? Omg no. Don't even go there. Engima pretty much ruined the game. They NEVER intended for every class to teleport through content. Ever. The godly 1.1 runewords were pretty much implemented to counteract how ridiculously hard they had made hell, so in one sense of the word they were "necessary". Overall though, they should have just found better ways to balance the harder difficulties. But if you really think about it, runewords are still just an extension of item customization and in that way, they can easily be replaced by a larger pool of better-designed items, which I believe we'll have.
As to committing to a build, permanence does not equal value. They've said multiple times that they agree with that, and don't find anything to be added simply by making someone remake a character if they make a mistake. I agree.
This horribly formed, ill-conceived argument... again?
"Customization" in Diablo II is a lie. Period.
When it came to stats you either did it the right way, i.e. enough str/dex to wear gear and the rest into vitality, or your character sucked. Having a choice between doing it one way or sucking is not really customization.
As for skills, so many were broken or pointless that there was only a handle of builds for each class. No one pumped lower level skills except as synergies, and anything worth taking was worth putting 20 points into 99% of the time, so skill points were fairly trivial as well. Almost every viable spec in Diablo II was based around 1 or 2 skills, so for all those dozens of skills spread out over three skill trees you used... one. Maybe two. Plus whatever was needed to get to them.
Enter Diablo III, where each class has 25~ viable skills, X5 skill runes for each, and six slots to put them in. That's a few billion possible combinations for each class without even talking about the 13~ passives for each class that will be quite game changing. But with a few billion ways to do it decently and conceivably thousands of way to do it really well, we're already talking about more customization than Diablo II ever dreamed of.
And did I mention that all of Diablo III's skills will work, and have working resource systems that are class appropriate to back them up?
Now enter in Diablo III's item pool. I'm betting it will be larger than Diablo II's anyway, but as we've already seen, the real defining factor here is that even the level 60 legendaries in Diablo III have randomized stats on them. Not randomized within a pre-existing selection of stats like the Diablo II items, but mod pools that will actually make two of the same legendary items essentially different items. Most customization in Diablo II was gleaned from the item selection, period. Enigma changed the game forever, entire specs were designed around it, etc. So instead of people determining the value of nice items in an asinine way like the defense on a Shako (aka Harlequin Crest), we'll actually be seeing trades done based on relevant things, and more importantly, we'll have a ton of customization options based on the randomized items we're finding. Not that there won't be tons of reason to stick to items that drastically increase our current character's primary attribute, but there will be tons of other things to consider as well.
I could expand on the consideration you posed as well as my answer, but since I've already fought and won this battle, I'll simply refer you to my blog post about it that was taken off the D3 forums:
Mmm no not harsh at all. We've all been waiting a decade for the game, pretty sure another country shouldn't be getting nearly a third of a day ahead of us. Just doesn't make any sense, period.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Diablo II
Jay Wilson wouldn't even have a job right now if it weren't for the above ^^
This is a discussion about professionalism, not titles associated with their name.
Bad job trying to turn the topic elsewhere.
For someone who is very bad at reading between the lines, you're sure insisting that others do it so well.
1. Dave was ASKED how he felt. And if you watched the interview at all you should be able to tell that the interviewer was trying VERY hard to get him to be a lot nastier. So yes, Dave was honest and yet professional, no other way to see that.
2. Jay reacted like a small child. Not exactly the type of personality that should be in his position in the first place. Human or not, when you're the game director of a franchise as popular as Diablo, working for a company as prolific as Blizzard, you should have a better temperament than that, or be smarter, but probably both.
3. His "heartfelt" "apology" was, I can guarantee you, a direct result of Mike Morhaime, or some other Blizzard higher-up, dragging Jay's ass into his office and saying "Look dude, you fucked up, go fix this and save some face", which he then tried to do. I.e. he only said those things because it's now plastered all over the internet.
Conclusion: David Brevik - 1 Jay Wilson - 0
You grow up.
We usually run 4-6 hours a night together, starting at 7-8CST. PM me if interested, we are very laid back, but are good about sharing gear and planning ahead as a group (i.e. don't wipe often).
I'd also recommend taking just about any other multishot rune. Discipline isn't all that necessary when your two Discipline skills are so low cost and situational. Fire at Will or Full Broadside would be much better runes in my opinion.
P.S. whoever said Blizzard has been quoted as saying it's easier to solo Inferno is full of it. They said VERY recently that it was slightly easier in a group play.
2. The trailer was awesome.
I was responding to the general thread, and including a response to what you said as well, but thanks for making a poor attempt at flaming me to invalidate what I said.
Nevertheless,
Hell was hard. Sorry, but if you think it isn't then you've never played the game. Hell in 1.0 Classic wasn't that bad, but when they basically re-rolled the entire difficulty in 1.09~, etc by adding a ton of monster defense and Immunities, it became hard, period. If you're the kind of player that has only ever experienced it by getting rushed through the game and throwing on godly items then you have no real perspective on what I'm talking about, and if you aren't, but still insist that it's easy, then I'm fairly convinced you don't know what you're talking about in general. The fact is, that a normal character who hits hell in a timely manner and with non-godly-inherited items will have their asses handed to them by even the most normal of hell mobs. They hit hard. They're hard to hit as a melee character, etc. Sorry, that's just the way it is.
As to your insistence that the Diablo III skill system isn't any better: you've either not played both games, not played Diablo III at all, or are just a bad judge of game mechanics because even the most inexperienced of gamers should pretty quickly realize that Diablo III's is pretty superior is just about every conceivable way. That they are both "linear" is not the point, nor was it ever the point.
1. Diablo III has working resource systems that support their respective skill sets.
2. Diablo II requires you to invest 20 points, therefore levels, to make a skill viable. So a fifth of your character's time in the game revolves around one skill.
Sorry, but that's pretty clear cut. And the fact that you were required to make your way through other skills via permanent skill point allocation further reinforces that conclusion.
As to skill builds, I can see how they'll work based on beta play. Is it the whole picture? No. But have I seen any glaring issues like ones that persisted in Diablo II for literally years without being fixed? No. That tells me that logically, with as many choices as we have in skills in runes, there will be exponentially more viable builds in Diablo III than in Diablo II, yet another bullet point for why the skill system is superior.
Oh and btw, well-formed arguments =/= rambling just because they show you you're wrong.
I can see that. I think a good game is pretty fun for ~95% of its players, and hard to master for ~90% of them. I think some of the predictions on these forums that only 1% of people will make it through inferno is a serious miscalculation. If that were even close to true I'd say the game was too hard. But on the other hand, if 100% of everyone who plays it is a master at it it's obviously balanced too far in the other direction.
I think our best conclusion at this point is to take Blizzard at their word:
Everyone, even new-to-RPGers will find Normal only moderately challenging. The real challenge starts at nightmare, where it gets ramped up considerably. Hell will then be yet another new horizon of hardness, and Inferno will challenge even the best. Obviously people who put a lot of time into video games and/or have considerable experience with this genre in particular or are part of a good group will probably have less trouble than those who aren't and don't. If all of that happens, then I'll say it's a pretty well made and balanced game as far as difficulty and learning curve.
Why won't you see a WW barbarian? You can't even tangibly debate that yet as we haven't had the skill in our hands as of yet. The skill looks plenty viable to me, however. But if you're suggesting that someone won't be able to use just a single skill, then you're both right, and disproving your own point. In fact, if the game is designed correctly, you shouldn't be able to just use one skill. That's the beauty of having a couple dozen skills that work for each class, we don't have to be one-hit wonders like in Diablo II.
Diablo III's skill system >>>>>>>>>>>> Diablo II's skill system.
How is Diablo III not superior? In every way? The skill system and proper design of resource systems alone is enough for me to say that it's light-years beyond. Nostalgia is not a factor here, the fact is that this game is better designed. Diablo II is a great game, and was ground-breaking... ten years ago. But it has also always been in a constant state of broken. From one patch to the next entire builds became unviable or just outright broken. In almost every major patch, I can think of at least one popular build that was based around things being bugged, such as the Iron Maiden Blood Golem Necro that ruled D2 Classic for quite a while.
Runewords? Omg no. Don't even go there. Engima pretty much ruined the game. They NEVER intended for every class to teleport through content. Ever. The godly 1.1 runewords were pretty much implemented to counteract how ridiculously hard they had made hell, so in one sense of the word they were "necessary". Overall though, they should have just found better ways to balance the harder difficulties. But if you really think about it, runewords are still just an extension of item customization and in that way, they can easily be replaced by a larger pool of better-designed items, which I believe we'll have.
As to committing to a build, permanence does not equal value. They've said multiple times that they agree with that, and don't find anything to be added simply by making someone remake a character if they make a mistake. I agree.
Really?
This horribly formed, ill-conceived argument... again?
"Customization" in Diablo II is a lie. Period.
When it came to stats you either did it the right way, i.e. enough str/dex to wear gear and the rest into vitality, or your character sucked. Having a choice between doing it one way or sucking is not really customization.
As for skills, so many were broken or pointless that there was only a handle of builds for each class. No one pumped lower level skills except as synergies, and anything worth taking was worth putting 20 points into 99% of the time, so skill points were fairly trivial as well. Almost every viable spec in Diablo II was based around 1 or 2 skills, so for all those dozens of skills spread out over three skill trees you used... one. Maybe two. Plus whatever was needed to get to them.
Enter Diablo III, where each class has 25~ viable skills, X5 skill runes for each, and six slots to put them in. That's a few billion possible combinations for each class without even talking about the 13~ passives for each class that will be quite game changing. But with a few billion ways to do it decently and conceivably thousands of way to do it really well, we're already talking about more customization than Diablo II ever dreamed of.
And did I mention that all of Diablo III's skills will work, and have working resource systems that are class appropriate to back them up?
Now enter in Diablo III's item pool. I'm betting it will be larger than Diablo II's anyway, but as we've already seen, the real defining factor here is that even the level 60 legendaries in Diablo III have randomized stats on them. Not randomized within a pre-existing selection of stats like the Diablo II items, but mod pools that will actually make two of the same legendary items essentially different items. Most customization in Diablo II was gleaned from the item selection, period. Enigma changed the game forever, entire specs were designed around it, etc. So instead of people determining the value of nice items in an asinine way like the defense on a Shako (aka Harlequin Crest), we'll actually be seeing trades done based on relevant things, and more importantly, we'll have a ton of customization options based on the randomized items we're finding. Not that there won't be tons of reason to stick to items that drastically increase our current character's primary attribute, but there will be tons of other things to consider as well.
I could expand on the consideration you posed as well as my answer, but since I've already fought and won this battle, I'll simply refer you to my blog post about it that was taken off the D3 forums:
http://www.diablofans.com/blog/181/entry-603-my-answer-to-diablo-vets-who-hate-diablo-iii/