You see... the point in Diablo as an hack & slash rpg is when you complete the campaign you can continue playing it for endless fun which is not the case with Diablo 3. Tomb Raider,Bioshock and all the other games that are shooters in general are made that when you complete the story and play a little multiplayer until you are bored, you move on, simple as that. I can proudly say that i am still playing Diablo 2, 13 years later. Too bad Diablo 3 didn't last a year of fun.
Why is D2's endgame more compelling to you than D3's? The way people tend to farm loot in D3's endgame is more dynamic then the typical Baal farm that was D2's endgame.
The primary reason that many of us actually quit our previous games for Diablo was because of the giant hype Blizzard had put on the difficulty.
The game was super difficult on Inferno at release, when did you start playing?
I played since launch day (technically about 18 hours after launch), and finished inferno by the end of the first week. I had no prior Action RPG experience aside from the D3 beta (and about 1-2 hours of Torchlight 1 before I got bored with it). I played a DH, which turned out to be quite OP at the time compared to other classes.
By the time I rolled my second class (Monk) and got to lv 60, inferno was already nerfed...
Edit: spelling mistakes
That is impressive... I started DH and had trouble progressing through A2 and 3 in original inferno because of item progression problems.
So Sim City has the same "always online" requirement as Diablo 3 and big surprise, opening weekend they have server problems! Not only did they get their act together within a week to provide the vast majority of players a solid, bug free experience, they are giving anyone who registers a copy of the game by the 25th a FREE GAME. Now that's service. That from a company that has a terrible history of taking care of their gamers. What do we get from Blizzard for dealing this login errors for months and doing beta testing for them?
I was playing D3 three hours after launch. It sounds like SimCity had much worse problems and they didn't have 7 million people trying to log in the first day.
I'm actually impressed that the trolling and hating is being kept in very manageable levels.
I guess your average whiner/hater doesn't bother posting in these topics (but they sure love creating a daily thread bashing the same feature of the game that they've been complaining about for the past 6 months).
That's because they are actually doing something right now, at least in paper. Before they were the trolls IMO.
Are you shitting me?
Why would they fix itemization before they had pLvls or before they fixed Inferno to not be a giant one-shot fuckfest? There *is* a method to the madness. Just because you choose to ignore it doesn't mean it's not there.
I'm the type of guy who prefer to install some windows and doors instead of painting the house, but that's just me.
It is pretty debatable whether doing the fast and easy fixes first was a bad way to go. To a certain extent nerfing inferno and giving paragon levels helped a lot with gear problems. I'm not sure how many people would actually be playing the game if inferno progression had stayed the same for too long.
Ok so D3 isnt told in cutscenes? And those shitty clips when you complete small quests where the story is shown as art in an old book type cutscene which is Blizzard's way of hiding the fact that they couldnt create cutscenes for those parts.
Yeah you are dead on brotha. Blizzard was trying to trick us by putting stupid ink animation cutscenes (that any child over two could do) where real cutscenes should be. Its not like state of the art cinematics take any time to make.
Sometimes more is less. I would prefer no history at all rather than what we have in Diablo 3.
Well that's definitely an argument you can make. For the most part I liked a little bit more plot development but disliked how much Azmodan and Diablo liked chatting. Also everything about Zulton Kulle was great.
I always love the complaints that the quest are too repetitive, and the world is too linear. Cause everyone used the random maps in D2, and didn't just run Baal and a few other bosses. And they totally didn't just power level past every single quest, which was totally not just "go here, kill this, except get this item first."
Diablo 2: Lord of Destruction feels more expansive, art direction is darker, grittier. The maps have more randomization and appear bigger. People can name their games for a specific purpose. Even the story is better though more abstract.
Mix it all together and you get a much more interesting dungeon crawler with higher replayability. More satisified gamers, higher user ratings etc. In short the superior true Diablo.
Additionally, it's not really fair to directly compare D2: LoD (2001) with D3 which came out more than a decade later.
The expectations for Diablo 3 were much MUCH higher than Blizzard delivered. Especially the map randomization, map size, amount of quests, side-paths and such features they have been disappointing.
The proof is in the pudding: Blizzard show us statistics of active players, popularity of Diablo 3, user ratings across the web etc and you will see.... that many fans left Diablo 3.
Map Randomization Comparison:
Diablo 2:
Diablo 3 (note: much fewer routes, same set-piece twice):
I agree with a couple things. More random zones would be a nice addition to D3, but you can't be serious about the story. D2 didn't even really have one. You follow some guy who turns into Diablo and then you kill him.
This would do the opposite of what you want; It would make items that DON'T roll sockets but roll everything else the suber uber ones that everyone wants, because then you get to add a 7th affix and 'cheat' the 6 affix rules. Unless ofc adding a new socket deleted an affix of your choosing.... All too complicated.
The blue post from a couple days ago has the best solution; Add more damage increasing, awesome affixes then there are slots. That way if you roll a main stat + vita + all resis + CC + CD + AS gloves, they might not be the best for you because you would rather have a + % physical damage instead of the CC, or + LoH instead of the vita, ect ect.
That kind-of blog gave me faith that Blizzard isn't only aware of the itemization problem, they already have an awesome way of fixing it.
Nope.
There are only 3 affixes on legendary wpns that are good.
Socket + CD + Main Stat
Many weapons that see absolutely no use can only roll 1 of the above, while others can get all 3. So this at best just slightly levels the playing field and gives some of them a 2nd dps affix. Current BIS already roll all 3, so they have little to nothing to gain, Some may become BIS, but thats fine too. The same weapons being BIS stagnant is boring anyways.
More affixes will help, but does that mean they are changing old legendaries or making new ones? Its also hard to believe that they can make any affix comparable to the OPness of CD. Lots of items already come with things like +% fire dmg, and no one still uses them...
That isn't entirely true. Items that add %elemental damage are often incredibly strong, especially combined with black weapons. This is one of the reasons won kim lau is a really good weapon for monks. +Elemental or +physical numbers could easily be tweaked to compare with crit stats even with current itemization because they are even bigger modifiers than CC and CD on a basic level. If you use fire damage all the time, +%fire damage would always boost your damage while %crit damage will always be conditional on actually landing a crit.
I personally think that crit damage should be nerfed in the same fashion as attack speed was to allow for new stats and old stats to compete. Crit chance would also become a bit more of a niche stat if you weren't always running critical attacks through a 400% multiplier.
Probably, but the problem is that the current +% to certain elemental damage is too low to be considered as an option. Instead you can add a +110% CD in a single item. They are not comparable.
Using the same idea, I would love to buff certain skills I use all the time, but the problem is the same, a +8% to Pestilence skill is not comparable to a +100% to CD, or even a +8-10% to CC. The numbers are way off. They should make affixes that could add up to 50%+ to a certain skill damage output.
I agree... rewarding rune and class specialization more would make for less generic characters.
Once you get past a certain threshold on dps you're going to find that other stats become more important than CD. If you're not to the point where you are willing to pay millions for the difference between 5.5 CC and 6 on a ring or 9% IAS vs 8% then I don't think you've got the experience/time invested in this game to really make a complaint that only CD is important.
I think the gear level you are talking about is less of an issue for the game itself than earlier character progression. Without significant help it is pretty hard to get good attack speed/cc/cd items that allow for fast farming or mp progression.
This would do the opposite of what you want; It would make items that DON'T roll sockets but roll everything else the suber uber ones that everyone wants, because then you get to add a 7th affix and 'cheat' the 6 affix rules. Unless ofc adding a new socket deleted an affix of your choosing.... All too complicated.
The blue post from a couple days ago has the best solution; Add more damage increasing, awesome affixes then there are slots. That way if you roll a main stat + vita + all resis + CC + CD + AS gloves, they might not be the best for you because you would rather have a + % physical damage instead of the CC, or + LoH instead of the vita, ect ect.
That kind-of blog gave me faith that Blizzard isn't only aware of the itemization problem, they already have an awesome way of fixing it.
Nope.
There are only 3 affixes on legendary wpns that are good.
Socket + CD + Main Stat
Many weapons that see absolutely no use can only roll 1 of the above, while others can get all 3. So this at best just slightly levels the playing field and gives some of them a 2nd dps affix. Current BIS already roll all 3, so they have little to nothing to gain, Some may become BIS, but thats fine too. The same weapons being BIS stagnant is boring anyways.
More affixes will help, but does that mean they are changing old legendaries or making new ones? Its also hard to believe that they can make any affix comparable to the OPness of CD. Lots of items already come with things like +% fire dmg, and no one still uses them...
That isn't entirely true. Items that add %elemental damage are often incredibly strong, especially combined with black weapons. This is one of the reasons won kim lau is a really good weapon for monks. +Elemental or +physical numbers could easily be tweaked to compare with crit stats even with current itemization because they are even bigger modifiers than CC and CD on a basic level. If you use fire damage all the time, +%fire damage would always boost your damage while %crit damage will always be conditional on actually landing a crit.
I personally think that crit damage should be nerfed in the same fashion as attack speed was to allow for new stats and old stats to compete. Crit chance would also become a bit more of a niche stat if you weren't always running critical attacks through a 400% multiplier.
and this post isn't about you and what you do when you play, sure you farm paragon when you "feel like it" but that's not the case for other people. and no i don't prefer 1.0.4 pre legendaries, it was a good change but they couldve done so much more. Anyone else not think it's ok that the only viable legendary 2h is skorn? or that staves or 2h mighty weapons arent even considered viable? I understand you're point about the skills and how in every games theres always going to be that one build that beats all but atleast in diablo 2 each class had more than 2 builds that were comparable to each other. Then they go and say they scrapped the old skill system for a new one for the same results? not even that but worse? and sure act 3 is by far the most efficient, im not asking for the other acts to be better or even the same, im asking for them to be comparable. because once in awhile a change of scenery would be nice without having to sacrifice efficiency. Yes, i play the game for fun, but most of the fun for me is finding the best items and i would assume that, that's how it is for atleast some people. So why not make some of the acts more comparable? is that so hard to ask?
Skorn is the only viable two hander in the same way that act 3 is the only good farming act. They are just the best options if you are looking for two handers/farming. Thats like saying the only 1 hander worth getting in D2 was BotD runeword.
Your suggestion isn't too hard to ask for except... there are proven routes in act 2 already that are efficient to farm. Act 1 has some good areas. How close do they need to be to eachother? Exactly the same? Whatever the case may be Blizzard has already made a few comments on monster density in 1,2, and 4 already so those acts could be changing. Try waiting.. you can probably do other stuff while you are waiting.
So I just finished reading that last blue post and I can't help notice that the devs tend to use the terms, "Plan to", "trying", "should be", "need to do more to improve", and none that say we are actually working on....This is a rage post and I just wanted to say something =).....along the lines of stop fucking around blizzard and get your shit together, there are plenty of ideas that can improve this game, some of them are very simple. For starters, take your team that worked on the console version and take them in to improve the PC/Mac version. At the rate these patches come in your players get tired and bored of the simple one sided ideas that you implement.
tl;dr Blizz get your shit together, stop brainstorming ideas and actually make some =) /ragequit.
I'm not quite sure how you can have a negative reaction to the Travis Day blue post. Blizzard shows a lot of awareness of major issues in itemization, namely trifecta gear and boring legendaries. The legendary boots example in the first paragraph shows how game-changing items could become. There is also great discussion and insight on issues like rune diversity, customization, and improving self found upgrades.
There is no "on" switch that Blizzard can press to suddenly give us all of these game improvements instantly. The changes mentioned in the blue post are far reaching and will take time to implement (discussion, art and design, coding, testing, etc.). Can anyone just be happy we got a really informative post from a giant video game company about how they want to improve their game for their fanbase?
They have every right to port their game to other platforms. Thing is they haven't sufficiently improved Diablo 3 to make it worthwhile for console gamers imo.
Diablo 1 was already a true classic.
I'm not sure why a game has to be a "classic" for it to get ported to another platform. I've seen three screenshots of the console version and the only change that I can see is in terms of UI. Does it really look like its pulling huge resources from game development?
I think they could drop the price of the game to ten dollars and people would find a way to complain about it.
So you're upset that people who don't play PC games are going to get a chance to play this game? And you're also mad because for some reason you think this game sucks? Furthermore, You're mad that Blizzard is trying to make some more money?... Well god and here i thought Blizzard was a business seems like they're just some chill dudes making games for free.
0
Why is D2's endgame more compelling to you than D3's? The way people tend to farm loot in D3's endgame is more dynamic then the typical Baal farm that was D2's endgame.
0
That is impressive... I started DH and had trouble progressing through A2 and 3 in original inferno because of item progression problems.
0
I was playing D3 three hours after launch. It sounds like SimCity had much worse problems and they didn't have 7 million people trying to log in the first day.
0
It is pretty debatable whether doing the fast and easy fixes first was a bad way to go. To a certain extent nerfing inferno and giving paragon levels helped a lot with gear problems. I'm not sure how many people would actually be playing the game if inferno progression had stayed the same for too long.
0
Yeah you are dead on brotha. Blizzard was trying to trick us by putting stupid ink animation cutscenes (that any child over two could do) where real cutscenes should be. Its not like state of the art cinematics take any time to make.
0
Well that's definitely an argument you can make. For the most part I liked a little bit more plot development but disliked how much Azmodan and Diablo liked chatting. Also everything about Zulton Kulle was great.
0
I agree with a couple things. More random zones would be a nice addition to D3, but you can't be serious about the story. D2 didn't even really have one. You follow some guy who turns into Diablo and then you kill him.
0
I agree... rewarding rune and class specialization more would make for less generic characters.
0
I think the gear level you are talking about is less of an issue for the game itself than earlier character progression. Without significant help it is pretty hard to get good attack speed/cc/cd items that allow for fast farming or mp progression.
0
That isn't entirely true. Items that add %elemental damage are often incredibly strong, especially combined with black weapons. This is one of the reasons won kim lau is a really good weapon for monks. +Elemental or +physical numbers could easily be tweaked to compare with crit stats even with current itemization because they are even bigger modifiers than CC and CD on a basic level. If you use fire damage all the time, +%fire damage would always boost your damage while %crit damage will always be conditional on actually landing a crit.
I personally think that crit damage should be nerfed in the same fashion as attack speed was to allow for new stats and old stats to compete. Crit chance would also become a bit more of a niche stat if you weren't always running critical attacks through a 400% multiplier.
0
Skorn is the only viable two hander in the same way that act 3 is the only good farming act. They are just the best options if you are looking for two handers/farming. Thats like saying the only 1 hander worth getting in D2 was BotD runeword.
Your suggestion isn't too hard to ask for except... there are proven routes in act 2 already that are efficient to farm. Act 1 has some good areas. How close do they need to be to eachother? Exactly the same? Whatever the case may be Blizzard has already made a few comments on monster density in 1,2, and 4 already so those acts could be changing. Try waiting.. you can probably do other stuff while you are waiting.
0
I'm not quite sure how you can have a negative reaction to the Travis Day blue post. Blizzard shows a lot of awareness of major issues in itemization, namely trifecta gear and boring legendaries. The legendary boots example in the first paragraph shows how game-changing items could become. There is also great discussion and insight on issues like rune diversity, customization, and improving self found upgrades.
There is no "on" switch that Blizzard can press to suddenly give us all of these game improvements instantly. The changes mentioned in the blue post are far reaching and will take time to implement (discussion, art and design, coding, testing, etc.). Can anyone just be happy we got a really informative post from a giant video game company about how they want to improve their game for their fanbase?
0
I'm not sure why a game has to be a "classic" for it to get ported to another platform. I've seen three screenshots of the console version and the only change that I can see is in terms of UI. Does it really look like its pulling huge resources from game development?
I think they could drop the price of the game to ten dollars and people would find a way to complain about it.
0
Welcome to D3 forums, don't expect too much