DiabloFans

Quote from Gheed2010

I understand why some ARPG fans hate TL2, but the starting 4 difficulties + HC option is a no-brainer, no matter your opinion on their execution of it. Making a player grind for 20 hours before the game even begins to get remotely challenging is just stupid.

Just my opinion.

That's another issue, that I wasn't really trying get at. We're talking about ways to make it difficult, when ever it gets difficult. Although I think I prefer how D3 is now, you have 4 "modes" to play through, so you can move through areas quickly, but if you want more of a challenge, increase the MP.

Quote from morbidlymystic

Quote from Loroese

There's no NV below 60 and they don't want people changing skills every other fight.

They don't give a shit about that, only a small minority of the players do. They just don't want people to play with the spellbook open, and rotate cooldown abilities.

Losing NV at 60 for the most part takes care of it, but not completely. Going to town isn't that big of a deal really.

Actually, I'd be extremely surprised if Blizzard didn't care about leveling. It's specifically the fans who don't bother leveling again that don't care. While that's probably the vast majority of softcore players, my guess is a lot of hardcore players actually care about that.

Also, the delay was there before NV (I think), so it was probably to prevent people from swapping skills to deal with specific monsters. They probably left it in because they DO care about the 1 to 59 game, even if some people don't.

Okay, forgive my ignorance, but how do you power level at all? I thought you could only join games you had gotten to by beating each quest?

Or does the party mechanic work differently?

Quote from Syronicus

I know I am going to take some heat for this but I say they add a "prestige" mode and offer up a special item, account bound for each prestige you make. Yes, I know, it's akin to the COD way of leveling up but think about it, if they made the paragon levels a touch easier to achieve but made 10 prestige levels you could essentially paragon to 1000 before obtaining that prestige level 10 uber item. It's just a thought.

Actually, I was going to suggest something like that. Although, instead of an item I'd say they could make it so the (voluntary) reset at plvl0 reduces you to something above what a normal lvl 60 plvl0 is (so when you get back to p100 you're stronger then you where before, or they add some sort of ePeen attraction. Maybe it's an honorific title (like the sir in D2). Maybe it's something decorative added to your armor (like the honor badges earned in Space Marine (the game)).

I think resetting the paragon would just be a bad idea, cause they've already said they wouldn't be resetting characters (no ladder seasons). That said, if they made a ladder that periodically reset, I don't think people would be upset.

Welp, to actually post something to help the OP:

At least one Monk specific change is that most of his spirit spenders now do a crap load more damage, like Seven sided strike now does base 1777% damage. I think Exploding Palm does 800ish. Basically, they didn't like that a lot of people just spammed MoC for the damage bonus, so they tried to make other spirit spenders better.

Also, not said is that Inferno received a number of general nerfs, so it's possible if you left cause of the brick wall, it's at least a little better now (not sure when you left). Additionally, they modified it so ilvl 63 items can drop in act 1 inferno (and Act 4 Hell dropped better gear too). But that's kinda an old change, so maybe you knew that.

Also, you may have heard, as it's recent, but they did just allow limited PvP. they call it "brawling" for reasons that I don't really care about (nor do I care that they aren't using the term Duel anymore). Don't know much about it except it won't kill your HC character, and you don't loss durability.

Quote from ruksak

Quote from Jaetch

Quote from GInthril

The fans and customers have spoken, they have spoken before release, during beta, after release and even now but blizzard just won't listen. They're going to stick to what makes them money, once they realize they start losing customer base they give the fans a little bit of what they want to keep them hanging on and then it's back to business.

I'm sure all the improvements they've made so far haven't been directed to player concerns. I'm sure the newest blue post by one of the devs regarding itemization and the AH has nothing to do with what players are concerned about and was pulled straight out of his ass.

In the wise words of Bashiok:

aren't you thankful?

^^ and this is exactly what I'm referring to in my above post. This toxic drivel "aren't you thankful" that the more immature crowd continues to throw in Blizzs face, a comment that has been taken severely out of context, has become the battle cry of the stupid and immature community.

Sometimes I feel sorry for Blizzard, which is unusual for my feelings about a corporation. I mean, they're one of the better developers. No matter whether you agree or disagree with the direction they take the game, they at least TRY and make it game first, they support things past the first 6 months without asking for more money (as opposed to companies that pump out 4 to 5 DLCs, including one that comes out on release day containing very near vital information for the story, and pop out maybe two patches), and they generally keep to consumer friendly business models (sure, there are some iffy things here and there, but they aren't dumping in BS stuff like EA).

But then people come along and say Blizz doesn't listen to the fans, immediately after one of the actual developers (not a CM or PR "dev") talks about their plans, specifically in relation to suggestions. Or they call the game a cash grab, and then go and happily purchase up the next Madden or CoD every year. Or they get butthurt that they had trouble playing on release night due to serve issues, and go and review bomb metacritic and amazon. Or they act like they deserve a refund after playing 100+ hours, and get touchy when people disagree.

I'm not saying Blizz is perfect, but man do they have some terrible forum users. It's almost like the forum equivalent of a MOBA game.

Quote from GInthril

I was just here to QQ guys, try and get some opinions from people and express mine.
Some stuff said i deff liked and some i thought were too much blizz fanboy shit. Thx for letting me speal, thats why i love the forums =)

I just want to point out that saying things "are too much blizz fanboy shit" only hurts you. A) it makes you less likely to actually listen to evidence (cause you assume it's just some fanboy shit) and B: people start treating you like a whiny mouth breather cause you ignore points because of a personal prejudice. I'm not saying that there aren't some Blizzard fanboys who would gladly buy a box of shit stamped with their name on it. But writing off all their arguments cause they are fanboys just moves you closer to the opposite camp, who says everything Blizzard does is terrible now, and they were perfect a decade ago (while buying all their games).

So, I was discussing with some of my B.Net friends about the difficultly of Inferno at launch and now, and I realized something - I've never heard anyone suggest (what I think) is a better way to implement difficulty in an ARPG, and more importantly, how do you design the game so the player can overcome it. I'm mostly interested in it because I don't believe in holding something against someone if I can't at least suggest something else.

Before we start, I think we can agree the item drops were a little off (basically needing to be in Act 3 to get items to let you beat Act 2), and it's not great when mobs can one shot you from off the screen. Aside from these, how would the difficultly have been improved (assuming they stayed true to the original idea, in that only a very few would actually be able to complete it)?

In an ARPG, the obvious way to make it more difficult is increasing monster strength/damage/numbers. Alternately, they could improve the AI. I'm not sure how much the AI could have been improved, so I'll work with the first one (if you have good examples of AI, feel free to work off that).

For dealing with improved monsters, I can only think of a few ways for players to improve: grind for levels, grind for loot, or improve character control so you can manually dodge attacks.

I think in this case, level grinding is out cause you get so little stat bonuses from levels (a few points when you regularly have 1000's of them), so they COULD have done that, but they' either need a HUGE amount of levels, or they'd have to rework the skills/stats so they radically improve every few levels. In any rate, this, to me, is basically the same idea as the loot, so I'll cover more of it there.

Grinding for loot. It's what they did. Yes, a gear check is one form of difficultly, no different than any other RPG. The issue here is the same as gaining levels, as things tend to increase exponentially, then eventually you get to the point where you have to take 100 hours to get any progress (unless they just make it so you can out level any content). For levels, it's because it always takes more to gain the next level than it did before (linear, exponential, or quadratic only change how fast that happens). For items, it's because every upgrade puts you closer to the BiS, which means there are less items that can be an upgrade.

For the player skill, I tend to believe them when they said it wasn't much fun to try and dodge EVERY attack (which is what they said most people ended up trying to do). I, personally, think so because the mouse is actually a really clunky way to move around (not aim, it's really good for that). I mean, we only have a limited form of this (kiting) and many of the guides comparing kiting builds to others all say the same, many people find this boring. This changes in a game with different controls (for example, the best part of Kingdom of Amalur's combat was that I could dodge or block or parry instead of just taking the hit).

So, all that said, I can't see where Blizz went wrong, assuming you believe their stated goal of making it nearly impossible and only for the hardest of the hardcore (aka, not about trying to get people to buy gear on the RMAH). Also taking into account what I mentioned earlier (and other little niggles that crop up, like certain champ affixes being OPed or some such). The control scheme prevented most of the player skill, so their only two alternatives where both time sinks.

Quote from maka

Go back and read the whole thing after you pick up your jaw ( ). The OP feels that the prevalence of CC/CD limits gear choice and pigeonholes all classes and most builds into the same affixes and the same gear.

I'm confused on two things. Only one of which has to do with this. The whole idea of why people are pigeonholed is because they only accept the fast farming gear possible, which means just enough ehp to survive, and then DPS DPS DPS! If they nerf CHC/CHD, then something else will be the best, and everyone will focus on that. Correct? Is a better solution to be so all DPS stats (which, lets be honest, as long as this game is about farming item drops, it's going to be the same idea of just enough ehp to live, and then all damage) are so amazingly balanced that you can stack any of them and it would work? That sounds near impossible. Or is the complaint that it is just easier to do this with CHC/CHD?

The second thing that confuses me is that CHD is really only OPed if you get enough CHC (and base stats). Is it really that easy to get enough CHC to make CHD useful? Further, everyone seems to be saying +CHD vs anything stat, but that's not the issue. It's actually +CHC AND +CHD vs any other stat. This might not matter if it's actually easy to get +CHC up enough. I'm not sure, never had that much cash.

Quote from Jaetch

There are a couple of books that are out that illustrate the childhood of Leah and how she came about to be in Cain's care.

She, as a character, wasn't around for D1 and D2's events. She's never seen a demon or an angel, or zombies, etc. Picture yourself in her shoes. You have an uncle that spent the last 15-20 years of your life ranting about the end of the world and a demonic invasion. Meanwhile, all this time there hasn't been a shred of concrete proof. Would you believe him?

I wouldn't. I'd be like Leah and go, "Yes, yes, uncle, flaming meteor demonic hordes of doom, here's a cup of tea, now go sit by the fireplace and be a good uncle and go sleep."

That was always my thought. But it I've seen a number of people arguing that she's a moron for not believing her uncle, specifically because "she just got attacked by a zombie." I know not everyone thinks so, but I've seen it used a number of times as a reason why the story wasn't good. So I was wondering if I missed something. Also, I find it annoying cause there are REAL reasons to complain about the game's story (how all the villains are the worst of the worst comic book monologuers for one), not this one.

Do we REALLY need ANOTHER duping thread? What was wrong with the other ones?

Also, it would be nice if people posted at least a short summary of what their video contains. Just posting the video makes me think it's just a lame attempt at getting more page views. Oh, and I'll gladly talk on topic, if there is a topic to discuss, cause right now, all I see is a YouTube video link I refuse to watch.

Quote from Bagstone

@Ferret: Thank you. Great post. By the way, it's not that people didn't pay attention to the layout in D2, it's that 1) they are romanticizing about the past (just install D2 again and you realize how your memory fools you) and 2) many people never played the full game's content but just did a quick run through all acts and difficulties and then only visited 1% of the game (Baal, occasionally some other farm spots).

I think you missed one. Thinking back to D2, how many tiles any given area where actually memorable? I can only think of a handful (that dead tree in Act 1 that gives you a scroll, the place where you USE said scroll). Mostly it was just a giant ass box, with little to nothing inside. We know have lots of stuff inside, with very distinct shapes in most places. The places where we don't (think caves) they never really seem to repeat. I think Blizzard could have fixed 3/4s of this issue if they just had of made the entrance and exit tiles changeable (even just a handful). In D2, it was mostly just a bunch of short, square, openings between similar boxes. Also, I believe the tiles are larger.

As per PoE or Torchlight, I haven't played them to the extremes as I have Diablo, but I can't remember many iconic doodads (to use a SC map maker term). Of course, that's cause those are hard to add and actually get the kind of randomization that games like PoE or D2 have. That was the reason for not randomizing any Borderlands maps - any given area was just too detailed to really randomize well.

I'm kinda surprised there isn't anything like this, cause it could have some fun stories. Anyway, what are you worst deaths due to your own (or perhaps other players) incompetence? (and if you learned something from that).

For me, I had a Wizard in Act 3 (making it worse, it was on normal). I started to use disintegrate, and all of a sudden, something like 5 of those random meteors that hit on the Stonefort came crashing down on me. Before I knew it, I was dead. Didn't even have time to react, didn't even see the circles signalling something was incoming.

Cause of that, I now refuse to use channeling spells, with the possible exception of Zombie Bear, cause using one I wouldn't be looking at my character, I'd be looking at the target, which meant I couldn't see if I was about to be killed. ZB is so short range, I think I can look at both.

Quote from Hiderius

Quote from carlucio

D3 is not dead yet, but will die if they don't add more content to the game, i stoped playing because i did almost everything i wanted to do with my WD.

Yeah, there's not enough content, the world is too narrow and restrictive, the quests get repetitive.

I...er...ah...aside from the "world is too narrow" which could possible be argued as meaning the maps are not random enough, none of these things describe what I have seen ANY ARPG become for long term play. Once you've finished the story, all there is to do is loot and/or play other characters. Just like...any...game? With the exception of MMOs.

Quote from Indimix

I'm not sure the problem is the content.. but how is managed.

I can almost assure you, if they fix the itemization (without necessarily adding anything new) the game will improve immensely.

Completely agree. After the stupid dialogue given by the Evils, itemization fix would be the best thing for the game. Unfortunately, fixing the dialogue (without just turning it off) isn't going to happen, and anything more than a band-aid for the itemization is going to take an expansion, at minimum.

Quote from Bagstone

@maka: Okay, but this is something that Blizzard said multiple times before release: Hell was the highest difficulty most players would complete. Inferno would only be accessible after weeks of farming, and progress through each of the acts in Inferno would require a lot of "grinding".

Good, someone else remembers this. I thought I was taking crazy pills or something, cause I never expected to beat Inferno. I always though D3 Hell and D2 hell were roughly comparable, and then Inferno was more like the Ubers, and/or the goal of being able to solo all the way through D2 Hell (not included in the previous statement cause you need such specific equipment to A) have the needed resists, and be able to deal with all the immunes).

Quote from Bagstone

They were also very clear upfront with the fact that some of the gear was only accessible in these late stages of Inferno, but it would require time. This was clearly communicated multiple times and the hardcore players were okay with that at the panels they gave at Blizzcon and so on. Even I was okay with this because quite frankly, I've never had access to the top gear or any high runes in D2 either. This was not a mistake, it was a deliberate, well-communicated design decision. The two mistakes were to let 1) level 63 loot not drop in all acts in Inferno (which was hotfixed after ~2-3 weeks) and 2) don't predict the impact on the AH, accelerating the gear acquisition for some of the top players (though the very top players have their "loot teams" anyways and would've cracked Inferno almost as fast even without the AH).

That whole "can't get lvl 63 in Act 1" was a mistake, but like you said, they hotfixed it.

And I think the problem is only with the AH because it means you only have to find a generic good (gold) to trade, instead of finding a specific good (what the person who has what you want needs). Well, that and you have SOOO many people on it. Perhaps they should have limited the AH to regions or some such, which would be balanced to try and keep a certain number of active people using it (kind like how they handle the global chat).

Quote from FoxBatD2

Quote from TheDFO

Instead of letting the super hardcore minority direct all effort towards "end game" by whining

Quote from Xenocow

/edit/ 7100 now

If that isn't a minority, I'd be worried about the game's future.

Seriously, what is more hardcore than a 1 hour hardcore race for some shinies? I applaud that they are aiming for a different group with a different approach, but "accessible" is not what I would call this.

You're right, it is technically a minority. But, I'd imagine it is FAR more, percentage wise, then the number of people who have beaten Inferno in Diablo. Further, it's something that anyone CAN participate in the race, unlike finishing Inferno.