Interview With Josh Mosquiera, Diablo 3 PlayStation Q&A at E3, Density and MP Settings on Console, Differences on Console and It

  • #21
    Quote from Richter82

    It does make a difference on the economy. Once an item gets upgraded it's not something you can trade anymore meaning that the supply is reduced on the AH. See the hardcore economy for a live example where items get removed frequently from the game by characters dying.


    Thats why I mentioned to give an OPTION to salvage very good items to something useful instead of garbage as it is now. The whole point is about creating an item sink. But in my opinion is binding items to an account the wrong way. Just give the players the opportunity to ALSO do something else with their items than just selling. For example items could get an internal rating for their quality and salvaging would give rewards according to that rating. Salvage results for very good items could be used to add sockets to an item or even to do an upgrade in the first place.
  • #22
    what do you recon what number will the itemization patch get? :))
    who wants to bet Blizz will be dumb enough to number it 1.10 (I suppose there will be a patch beforehand with the new legendary textures and maybe some minor skill balances/revamps), whereas given the game changing content of the patch it could (and should) easily be patch 1.50 :)
    i is no hater, me just no like my games half-baked :fret:

    although i must say i like the idea of a little retarded treasure goblin running alongside, collecting junk before I accidentally pick it up
  • #23
    People were so pissy about a snake running with you collecting gold for you back in beta...it's funny to see em react to the (potential) goblin running with you collecting items.
  • #24
    Quote from theecheshirekat

    People were so pissy about a snake running with you collecting gold for you back in beta...it's funny to see em react to the (potential) goblin running with you collecting items.


    The concepts are slightly different. The goblin will pick up all trash items, which is great. He doesn't throw them in the inventory, just makes them disappear from the ground. But sometimes he also actually throws a few good items back. Different mechanics altogether.
  • #25
    Cant belive people are bicthing about a game where you have a chance to become a billionair on any item you drop. Or even at the fact that 1 billion only costs 30$ on the AH so if your really unlucky and want to enhance your game atlease you have that option. These changes sound wicked!

    Ama start saving all my D.E's for crafting when this pacth hits. I hope it takes a while. even tho i have 9 billion gold right now i want to overkill gearing my barb up when this comes out. also have 417 D.E's saved.
  • #26
    "... and a Treasure Goblin that follows the character, picking up grey and white items and sometimes throwing the player magical items"

    Perhaps something like a tier of goblin mercenaries? Maybe you can hire them instead of the followers? They would pick up junk items and converts it to next tier once they got a full bag? Perhaps job desirable items? To reduce visual and graphic disturbances, other player's goblin will not show up on your screen. Make them "up-gradable" to make them move or pick faster.
    Evil is in its prime...
  • #27
    I see two bad things about itemisation. Obviously to many 'good' affixes. And rng affixes on legendary items. Quick example. I played lately a bit just to kill time. I had looted some legendaries, among which there were Resonating Fury and Manticore. Guess what? Both are just garbage, their value isn't even around 300k gold, they are that crap. You prolly know how much thier better versions can cost. It's just discourageing. After playing for around 4-5 hours i didn't get a single item which would be worth over 1 milion gold. Having that experience i can understand why people are bored/dicouraged. Also i get a feeling that it isn't worth to pick any rare items apart jewelery (rings/amulets), gloves and only a few number of legendary items are worth selling.

    What i would add:
    - recipie to socket any kind of item, so potentialy there are more better ones
    - legendaries either more common or less rng on them, at least don't make 2-3 random affixes (i think its the most insane idea and why some items are that overpriced)
    - add runes (no runewords), so you can upgrade an item a bit, it can be another req. for crafting, another way to slowly but stadily gain gold
    - add talismans (with separate inventory tab), but again with limited affixes, just another small upgrade/slow way to get gold
    - elixirs that let you chage 1 main stat (str/dex/int/vit), to another main of your choice

    Apart items i'd like three things that would make me play D3 for hours, even with such crap itemisation as it is now:
    1) An endless dungeon. By that i mean 'a map' where you have a random cave/crypt/dungeon/ like locations with a lot of 'floors'/levels.
    Something like Zoltun Khule sanctuary let's say x30 larger. With sub bosses like Zoltun Khule/Maghda/Spider Queen etc every few lvls, who potentialy drop a slightly bit better loot than ordinary elite pack. Maybe 2-3 'large bosses' throughout entire dungeon thingy.
    I'd enjoy such thing much more than playing short sessions, where i just teleport from one map to other without any particular order just to have best exp. It just kills an adventure and is to repetitive.
    2) Give players more spells/abilities than 6 at once. Not that i want op char, but there are so many cool spells that are not used. Its pretty dull to have such a limited number at one time and many are not so viable. It leads to that there are 2-3 viable builds per char. Blizzard was giving some crazy number of combinations, but how many are actually used? 20 overall? I liked it the way it was in D2. I could have one stronger 'tree' with all its synergies, and almost all the other weaker ones. I miss the times of summon/bone Nec with some curses and Enigma plus like 4 aura items. That was fun for me.
    3) Necromancer class. That alone would prolly pin me for D3 for more time that i already played (and given that i could use more that 6 spells at a time I would prolly farm myself to death). WD is already cool but Nec is like my fav char.
  • #28
    Quote from overneathe

    The concepts are slightly different. The goblin will pick up all trash items, which is great. He doesn't throw them in the inventory, just makes them disappear from the ground. But sometimes he also actually throws a few good items back. Different mechanics altogether.


    I think the goblin is an example as to exactly why the itemization patch isn't going to happen as fast as some of us would like it to. It's a really unique (lol) effect. This is the kind of thing that legendaries and sets need but they are not easy to come up with by any stretch of the imagination. I realize that I am not a game developer, but there is no way that I could come up with enough ideas that are of the caliber of that goblin item (or the double Hydra item) to effectively re-tool all Legendary and Set items. It's a daunting task, but the goblin item is showing creativity that SHOULD put to rest this talk about D3s itemization because that shit is nuts!

    You may not have a total "BiS" item with this goblin thing, but what you will have is more chance for loot. Is the tradeoff worth it? Maybe, maybe not. The only thing I hope is that it doesn't become a "follower item" because then it would be a no-brainer to equip your follower with an item that sucks up garbage items and sometimes spits out a rare.
    66.0k elite kills :: 1.97m total kills :: p244
    Planet Express <PlanEx>
    (V) (°,,°) (V)
  • #29
    Quote from Ducha

    Quote from Elendiro

    Whoever hired Josh Mosquiera needs a beating.
    Oh man, I really hope that's a joke.

    Can we not start this whole hate train again. It's comments like that that make our community look bad.


    Well, I'd rather them fix things as they can rather then one gigantic patch. That's uniquely Josh's decision.
  • #30
    I dont want to sound negative, but all these interviews I've read over last year are still pointless. There are minimum features have been implemented into the game from those talks. I haven't rebooted my game for half a year now and nothing still have changed.
    Why tease with a Beta game by promising more candy while they just can't deliver?
  • #31
    So the players have needed an item revamp for a year now, we get the go-ahead that its in the works earlier this year, we for the most part expect that this item revamp should be pushed out next patch since it was hoped for 1.08 but didnt make it in since its a "big" project (while its not, since the first iteration of the item revamp was just changing drop tables and changing the range on item affix/prefix's, neither of which is complicated yet can be pretty tedious if you do them one at a time...hello batch files.), and they decided to pull one of the classic blunders of any company, feature bloat.

    Blizzard is terrible when it comes to frequent patching; for years they have taken a backwards design approach to waiting until their "unique" features are finished before patching, which means hotfix's, bug squashes, simple changes, have to be delayed release until their "major" data files are ready to ship. This is like companies that delay releases of games because they keep working on new features to the game every week, which ends up with a game that has no focus and a lot of mediocre "inspiring" content, and dead wallets with pushy publishers.

    Companies like Trion and GGG push patches out as soon as fix's and features are ready, they dont clump up every feature and change into a "mega patch". Players dont need to wait 3+ month cycles to get a change that only takes a toggle to fix, or a addition of a single character to fix a line of code. They also dont delay features because "something similar / related is in development too..." . The changes to the higher rolled stats and drop frequency doesnt require that the legendaries, sets, special goblin gopher, etc. to be included. , those affect the game in an entirely different manner; they are an addition to the game (just like the "new" legendaries we got last year).

    The whole "we run the risk of breaking the game" is a sad cop-out. If you break the game, its because the people who wrote the code and handled the patch messed up, not because the patch was smaller and the process was more frequent. If you do it right the first time, ( which i know doesnt happen all of the time ) , then there's no need for extensive QA testing to make sure your RMAH doesnt break because of an error going from 1 mil gold to 10 mil gold. On that note, blizzard bundles everything up , and always creates a mess somehow, so the entire "view" of them creating less frequent and better systems to release content, doesnt pan out ever for them. Its even more amazing after a month+ on the PTR...with the problems being pointed out by the players for weeks, they still get rolled out with the "finalized" patch...and it breaks.

    So again, the always better solution (unless a feature is absolutely critical to be delayed, which is rarely ever the case except to create "themed" content patches like introductions of new raid tiers, etc.) , is to create and release frequent smaller patches to your game / software. Because they are smaller, they are LESS likely to be put out with bugs that get hidden among all the other lines of code, they are less intrusive on players monthly bandwidth limits, you fix the game issues in a much more smoother manner than hamfisting changes a few times a year, and players are sated by having new features and "goodies" to play with all the time. This also prevents / slows down dead periods in player population, which is critical for games that require a monthly sub. Have we still not learned from other companies how to NOT create another ICC / DS fiasco for the company? Ill give a suggestion ( like i havent overstayed my welcome already with them) , dont create periods of months and months where nothing new happens to the game, it never ends well, ever; especially with today's populous that "gets over" things in a heartbeat if they are not constantly tugging at their faces.

    I get that constantly sprinkling words of encouragement about the development of a game helps to keep the game relevant (yay marketing), but they are just words. When you release the content, then people can take something seriously. Dropping bread crumbs of "itemization changes coming!" for a year before it happens, is just shady , typical PR.
  • #32
    Quote from JoeShmo

    [snip]


    Thanks for your post, seems like you put a lot of thought into that. However, you still overlooked a few things:

    1) Diablo 3 is not a subscription-based game. You cannot expect weekly updates. The reason why PoE gets weekly updates are because it's in beta, there's no money involved, and they don't have a million players that just play and leave for good if a patch in one week breaks the game.

    2) Upon reading your post it becomes pretty obvious that you have no idea how difficult programming is. There is no such thing as "easy change" for anything in a game. If you change one line of code, such as the proc rate of a wizard's spell, all of the sudden their might be some phase beast champion affix that will 1-shot players in rare occasions. Don't believe that? Ask people who played WoW vanilla, they can tell you...

    3) Since everything you change can affect anything else in the game, you need to do QA testing before you release it. For most of us it's not necessary because we don't care about the problems, but there are some players who really rely on QA testing. For example: hardcore players - if the phase beast in aforementioned example 1-shots a HC character, hundreds of hours of work and careful gearing go to waste, just because someone skipped QA. Or people who are top-geared and have characters worth the equivalent of thousands of dollars - regardless if they found the items, got the money via AH flipping, or credit card: it's just not right to make all their equipment worthless because you didn't want to test stat changes and its effects on the AH. Or casual players who are so annoyed of a new bug after a patch that they quit - forever.

    Last but not least, this sentence here struck me: "This is like companies that delay releases of games because they keep working on new features to the game every week, which ends up with a game that has no focus and a lot of mediocre "inspiring" content, and dead wallets with pushy publishers." You can't possibly talking about Blizzard here. Blizzard is the one and only video game developer in the world that can tell their publishers to postpone a release as long as they want (happened for every game), reset a development (SC2, D3) or cancel a game (SC: Ghost, WC: Adventures, D3: MMORPG).
  • #33
    Quote from Richter82

    Quote from Efrye

    Wheres your problem? Don't trade if you don't want to. The items wouldn't become worse just because of being tradeable.


    Making items non-tradeable when upgraded will help keep the economy fresh. As it is right now its pretty hard to find anything worth selling.


    That is not the point. The game a multiplayer game, you suppose to interact with others. Making item untradable remove 1/2 of it. The other half is coop, which they removed long time ago. So, they finally created a single player DRM product.
  • #34
    Quote from Bagstone

    Quote from JoeShmo

    [snip]


    Thanks for your post, seems like you put a lot of thought into that. However, you still overlooked a few things:

    1) Diablo 3 is not a subscription-based game. You cannot expect weekly updates. The reason why PoE gets weekly updates are because it's in beta, there's no money involved, and they don't have a million players that just play and leave for good if a patch in one week breaks the game.


    I just had a feeling someone was going to take that sentense out of context. I never stated that Diablo 3 was a sub based game, I mearly stated that that sub based games are affected even greater by it. And yes, we can expect and we should very well expect weekly updates if they are relevant, like bug fixes and completed features. This is a problem that companies have done well to confused the playerbase about, and thats how frequent content updates can be.

    Just because something doesnt have a monthly monetary fee, doesnt mean its value is any less; and if anything most monthly fees dont reward players with better value for their game, its very much an up and down curve depending on what part of a very long development cycle the company is at. This is why having frequent updates makes that monthly value reasonable.

    The other problem is that companies dont feel required to further update a game if they are not recieving a possible profit from it, ala monthly fees, dlc, in game transactions, etc. This still doesnt devalue the need for frequent updates, it just means that companies have refused to support their game honorably after the initial release. How many companies shovel out a bad or unfinished game and then just quietly disapear, usually with a "we cannot afford to further develop the game" ? A metric ton. How many games can honestly say they are "complete" at release? Almost none of them. There are also games, like Diablo 3, that have stated that they will continue to develop the game for the years to come. So there is no clause that says "We do not have to be professional about our game support, you are not giving us money" . And yet they are recieving continued monetary support, just like a free to play game though via the RMAH.

    Also, PoE hasnt been in beta for months and it has a ton of players. Also, LoL has a much higher player base than Diablo 3, and it has an almost annoyingly frequent amount of updates. The amount of games that actually do frequently update their game is not some small number, and not one thats religated to only niche genre or money.

    2) Upon reading your post it becomes pretty obvious that you have no idea how difficult programming is. There is no such thing as "easy change" for anything in a game. If you change one line of code, such as the proc rate of a wizard's spell, all of the sudden their might be some phase beast champion affix that will 1-shot players in rare occasions. Don't believe that? Ask people who played WoW vanilla, they can tell you...


    Thats a rather funny and ironic statement to make, considering you saying that shows that you do not have an idea in how programming works, or that your "expertise" in the field is fed solely from what game developers have told you in PR talks and what "a friend of a friend" have said. I in fact know very well how programming "works" . I do not claim to be the be all and end all of all things software, but I very well know the very basic rule that every computer science student or enthusiest learns when they start on the path for software development; you're code is only as good as you make it to be.

    Just because blizzard made a lot of mistakes, and a lot of companies, in their coding process, who the hire, how they treat their workers, etc. does not mean that the "physics" of coding is some sort of unrulely dragon that you cannot fathom to saddle, that only god himself has the knowhow to write beautiful code. Changing 1 line of code does not break another line of code, unless you improperly wrote all the code. Giving a sword +5 to str accidently does not create 100 black dragons to spawn in a noob friendly zone, unless something went horribly horribly wrong in designing the game. Now, you can argue things like: causing memory leaks, runtime errors, eronious movement / controls , etc. , those are valid issues that come up with improper code and/or bad design. Having your armor turn blue when you pick up a rock does not qualify as "just how it works when you code".

    Bad programmers make bad code, bad teachers make bad programmers, and bad bosses make bad workers. Code, only does what you tell it to do.


    3) Since everything you change can affect anything else in the game, you need to do QA testing before you release it. For most of us it's not necessary because we don't care about the problems, but there are some players who really rely on QA testing. For example: hardcore players - if the phase beast in aforementioned example 1-shots a HC character, hundreds of hours of work and careful gearing go to waste, just because someone skipped QA. Or people who are top-geared and have characters worth the equivalent of thousands of dollars - regardless if they found the items, got the money via AH flipping, or credit card: it's just not right to make all their equipment worthless because you didn't want to test stat changes and its effects on the AH. Or casual players who are so annoyed of a new bug after a patch that they quit - forever.


    Again, propper coding negates the need for heavy Q & A . Do we live in a world where everyone writes beautiful code? A lot of people do, but if someone who doesnt messes something up, of course things will break. Do I think having a testing phase is important? I sure do. I never stated it wasnt important, I only stated that that Blizzard's Q&A is laughable, and they still release errors that have been pointed out to them for weeks, and break things in the game that have no relation at all to what they were working on. Again, this is not something that "just happens" as a result from programming, its a result from poor workmanship. Q&A, as well as frequency of errors, can be improved by doing the job correctly the first time around, or at the very least focused more heavily on doing a propper job.

    Im sure there are employees at blizzard that do their best, and some that dont realize that they are making mistakes or making unnessisary bloat to their game. Its still the job of blizzard and the employees to put forth an effort to correct and improve the quality of work, as well as comprehend preventative skills to keep things like this from becoming a hinderance.


    Last but not least, this sentence here struck me: "This is like companies that delay releases of games because they keep working on new features to the game every week, which ends up with a game that has no focus and a lot of mediocre "inspiring" content, and dead wallets with pushy publishers." You can't possibly talking about Blizzard here. Blizzard is the one and only video game developer in the world that can tell their publishers to postpone a release as long as they want (happened for every game), reset a development (SC2, D3) or cancel a game (SC: Ghost, WC: Adventures, D3: MMORPG).


    I don't believe you understand the statement you quoted, or the context of where you quoted it from. Blizzard "postponing a release as long as they want" , ' reset a development" and "cancel a game" are exaclty the issues I was talking about. Blizzard postpones releases of things "to create the best quality content" sure, but thats not even half of the real reason.

    They postpone because they cant get a grip on what it is they are trying to create, they try too many different iterations of the same thing, the coding / development becomes a much bigger job than the workers can accomplish in the given time, someone changes thier focus part of the way through because of a sudden development, etc. etc. Preaching quality is a very admirable thing, but blizzard has been far from "quality" work for years now.

    They have also admited several times (as shields against people getting angry about features not being released) , that they spend a lot of time reworking the same thing over and over, even to the detriment of the feature itself. They also spend a great deal of time trying to create features that either dont pan out as well as they had hoped (or us hoped) for , or dont even make it to finish. These are design resources that countless companies waste and get lost "in the heat of" when developing games, especially before a release of one. These are not examples of "making the game better" , they are examples of "going overboard in design" and creating development bloat.

    Is it great and good for companies to want to experiment? Sure is. But you dont sacrafice the overarching progress of the game "to feel something out." . Too many companies, with kickstarter for example, create these huge stretch goals to "improve the game with better funding" , and bottom out shortly after wtih all that extra funding. They dont know how to properly manage their resources, and know when to "stop" or "let it go" , if even temporarly until a better time to work on it.

    Titan is a great example at blizzard tryin to create something without a propper focus and desgin, and wasting a lot of manhours and resources (leaving the rest of their franchises with less manpower) , only to scrap it and start over with a smaller team. Does this happen? Yea, it happens, and its unfortunate. But blizzard has done this too frequently (ghost, diablo 3, content updates for wow, etc.) , that its no longer a "Hey, cut them a break, stuff happens." and its entirely "Hey, get your development teams and higher ups heads out of the sand."

    They've shown full well that their last several years, and their comitments of "getting better" , have fallen flat. They need to actually change up and create a new system for development, or they will continue to waste time, effort, money; and delay, reset, and cancel games/content for the forseeable future.

    Its a choice, not a condition, to stay the course when you are doing poorly at something.
  • #35
    Quote from JoeShmo

    So the players have needed an item revamp for a year now, we get the go-ahead that its in the works earlier this year, we for the most part expect that this item revamp should be pushed out next patch since it was hoped for 1.08 but didnt make it in since its a "big" project (while its not, since the first iteration of the item revamp was just changing drop tables and changing the range on item affix/prefix's, neither of which is complicated yet can be pretty tedious if you do them one at a time...hello batch files.), and they decided to pull one of the classic blunders of any company, feature bloat.

    Blizzard is terrible when it comes to frequent patching; for years they have taken a backwards design approach to waiting until their "unique" features are finished before patching, which means hotfix's, bug squashes, simple changes, have to be delayed release until their "major" data files are ready to ship. This is like companies that delay releases of games because they keep working on new features to the game every week, which ends up with a game that has no focus and a lot of mediocre "inspiring" content, and dead wallets with pushy publishers.

    Companies like Trion and GGG push patches out as soon as fix's and features are ready, they dont clump up every feature and change into a "mega patch". Players dont need to wait 3+ month cycles to get a change that only takes a toggle to fix, or a addition of a single character to fix a line of code. They also dont delay features because "something similar / related is in development too..." . The changes to the higher rolled stats and drop frequency doesnt require that the legendaries, sets, special goblin gopher, etc. to be included. , those affect the game in an entirely different manner; they are an addition to the game (just like the "new" legendaries we got last year).

    The whole "we run the risk of breaking the game" is a sad cop-out. If you break the game, its because the people who wrote the code and handled the patch messed up, not because the patch was smaller and the process was more frequent. If you do it right the first time, ( which i know doesnt happen all of the time ) , then there's no need for extensive QA testing to make sure your RMAH doesnt break because of an error going from 1 mil gold to 10 mil gold. On that note, blizzard bundles everything up , and always creates a mess somehow, so the entire "view" of them creating less frequent and better systems to release content, doesnt pan out ever for them. Its even more amazing after a month+ on the PTR...with the problems being pointed out by the players for weeks, they still get rolled out with the "finalized" patch...and it breaks.

    So again, the always better solution (unless a feature is absolutely critical to be delayed, which is rarely ever the case except to create "themed" content patches like introductions of new raid tiers, etc.) , is to create and release frequent smaller patches to your game / software. Because they are smaller, they are LESS likely to be put out with bugs that get hidden among all the other lines of code, they are less intrusive on players monthly bandwidth limits, you fix the game issues in a much more smoother manner than hamfisting changes a few times a year, and players are sated by having new features and "goodies" to play with all the time. This also prevents / slows down dead periods in player population, which is critical for games that require a monthly sub. Have we still not learned from other companies how to NOT create another ICC / DS fiasco for the company? Ill give a suggestion ( like i havent overstayed my welcome already with them) , dont create periods of months and months where nothing new happens to the game, it never ends well, ever; especially with today's populous that "gets over" things in a heartbeat if they are not constantly tugging at their faces.

    I get that constantly sprinkling words of encouragement about the development of a game helps to keep the game relevant (yay marketing), but they are just words. When you release the content, then people can take something seriously. Dropping bread crumbs of "itemization changes coming!" for a year before it happens, is just shady , typical PR.


    Spot on.

    I recently came back to Diablo 3, i was thinking that i would see an itimazation patch july/august .. lol i gotta wait 5 months+? well ill be on a break from the game twice before that is out... Geezzz
  • #36
    Quote from JoeShmo

    Changing 1 line of code does not break another line of code, unless you improperly wrote all the code.


    This is just not how coding works. In a fully-fledged game like Diablo 3 that has millions of lines of code, unforeseen things just happen. You talk about programming as if there were two kinds of programmers: those who make mistakes, and those who make no mistakes. This is just wrong. Bug-free software is a myth.

    If you believe otherwise, read up a bit, for example follow some of the links and arguments in this StackOverflow discussion, familiarize with the history of TeX (which was believed to be bug-free since 1982, but Donald Knuth is still sending out checks to people - a friend of mine got his just a couple of years ago), or just spend some time around real programmers. No programmer will ever say he has never made a programming mistake (and if you know someone who says that he's either lying or not really a programmer).

    Quote from JoeShmo

    They postpone because they cant get a grip on what it is they are trying to create, they try too many different iterations of the same thing, the coding / development becomes a much bigger job than the workers can accomplish in the given time, someone changes thier focus part of the way through because of a sudden development, etc.

    They have also admited several times (as shields against people getting angry about features not being released) , that they spend a lot of time reworking the same thing over and over, even to the detriment of the feature itself. They also spend a great deal of time trying to create features that either dont pan out as well as they had hoped (or us hoped) for , or dont even make it to finish. These are design resources that countless companies waste and get lost "in the heat of" when developing games, especially before a release of one. These are not examples of "making the game better" , they are examples of "going overboard in design" and creating development bloat.

    Is it great and good for companies to want to experiment? Sure is. But you dont sacrafice the overarching progress of the game "to feel something out." . Too many companies, with kickstarter for example, create these huge stretch goals to "improve the game with better funding" , and bottom out shortly after wtih all that extra funding. They dont know how to properly manage their resources, and know when to "stop" or "let it go" , if even temporarly until a better time to work on it.

    Titan is a great example at blizzard tryin to create something without a propper focus and desgin, and wasting a lot of manhours and resources (leaving the rest of their franchises with less manpower) , only to scrap it and start over with a smaller team.


    Okay, this is my last comment to what you said here - initially didn't want to respond but there are just some things that cannot be left uncommented. It's fairly obvious that we disagree in how software development works, and I'm not gonna say that what you said is wrong (though I believe it is) - I just want to clarify some things for other readers.

    1) You cannot compare some small Kickstarter project with a Blizzard game. Period.

    2) You have no idea about the Titan development (if you had, you wouldn't be bitching about Blizzard so much). Please refrain from making statements like "blizzard tryin to create something without a propper focus and desgin, and wasting a lot of manhours and resources".

    3) "Iterating too often" is almost impossible. In fact, everything you say about Blizzard's style of game development is what distinguishes them from all the other companies that create software with mediocre quality. If you think that Blizzard's software is bad in terms of quality, then please move along and keep thinking that way, but in the world of software engineers and game developers you won't find many people to agree with you.
  • #37
    "The 2 billion gold Auction House cap might get raised, but it's a fairly complex thing to do technically"

    this is the last thing we need at this point...

    also, itemization not untill next year just made me decide to just walk away from the game till then. not worth it since that patch on the horizon was the only thing keeping me interested enough to keep logging in. :(
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.
Posts Quoted:
Reply
Clear All Quotes