Official Blizzard Quote:
"First thing's first, the mongrel is now (or again) known as the Zombie Dog. It was the name that was used when the idea was first proposed and all the way through development. Calling it a mongrel was kind of confusing because everyone was so used to calling it a zombie dog for so long, no one remembered to call it a mongrel (dune thresher and fallen imp suffer from it as well to a degree). The name zombie dog doesn't need to be lore-fied really. It describes the skill perfectly, so why not use it?
So anyway, right, the fire and poison/locust enhancements for the zombie dogs was removed. It was a cool idea but it just wasn't really panning out to be anything meaningful. It was sort of confusing as to why you would be switching between fire and poison, was it to keep an additional DoT active, or maybe there would be tactical reasons for it? But it just wasn't really jiving in a way that made sense for the rest of the game as it all came together more. It wasn't shaping up to be a meaningful or fun decision to make on-the-fly. And if you didn't happen to spec into the skills that would empower the mongrels in different ways, what then? You're just constantly refreshing a fire DoT on them? To what end? It seemed more and more that a decision that was made at the base skill, either through spending points in another skill (passive potentially), or using particular runes to alter the zombie dogs, made the most sense.
I haven't spoken to the designers about it, so I could be way out of line, but I think the potential for passives that affect all "summoned zombies" is definitely there as there are quite a bit more of them that exist now. The gargantuan, zombie charger, wall of zombies, grasp of the dead, and then the zombie dogs of course."
Official Blizzard Quote:
"It's not an issue of coming up with various ways the effects could work, it's the issue of why is it interesting or fun to switch between the two? Why/when/how would I choose to set my dogs on fire versus poisoning them, and most importantly! could it be done accurately enough so that it actually makes a difference?
"Ok I'm a firebomb WD.
Firebombing, firebombing... Oh sweet, my zombie dog lit on fire and is doing extra damage/trail of fire/etc etc
Firebombing, firebombing. Yup, he's still on fire and doing all that stuff.
Still on fire.
Always on fire since I use firebomb so much.
... still on fire.
This might as well be a passive."
Repeat the above for locust swarm.
"Ok I have firebomb AND locust swarm!
Firebombing, cool he's on f... wait nope I accidentally hit him with locust swa... nope now he's on fire agai... ok they need to stop getting in my way I want them to be on fire but they... ugh.
This should just be something I can choose/switch in a more meaningful way.""
The skill should be called Mongrel, and the mouse-over description should say "Summons a Zombie Dog to fight for you," or something of the like. 'Summon Zombie Dog' just sounds ridiculous to me... Zombie Dog should be the description, not the name.
I think it's a great concept to have infected dogs walk up and spread their disease on hapless enemies. What difference does it make if you cast it on them or if it's passive? Does that extra bit of clicking on the dog add to the experience of the game? What they're saying is: no, it makes it more confusing.
Personally, I think it's the customization of the summons that made the idea so appealing. There is still plenty of room not only to include it, but also to expand upon it with the Rune System.
I hate them with a passion.
Yes, removing clicks removes from the experience. Why not just remove as much special interaction as possible.
So the whole argument is that people want to have one flea dog and one hot dog out at the same time? Or do people just think it's cool that you can throw fire on your own minions?
Personally, I like the idea of upgrading with a Rune, because it frees up the skill tree. You could put the "Flea Rune" on Zombie Dog and have them gain the Locust Swarm effect, meanwhile building up your fire tree. You wouldn't have to invest in the Locust Swarm skill itself to be able to use its effect with the dogs.
If anything, the possibilities for further Zombie Dog customization is the reason the feature was removed, and doesn't entirely mean that it will stay removed or will not reappear in some other form.
The skill name wouldn't be so bad if they were actually zombie dogs. They look like dog like creatures, perhaps scavengers. Zombie dog is just so cheap and tasteless, unless, of course, we get actual zombie dogs.
It comes to my attention that computer games, having been part of the generation of people who grew up on them, do take a big part of our lives/time, away. It's not because a game isn't classified as educational that they shouldn't provide complex or otherwise educational content.
This is starting to look like if a creature doesn't contain the term Zombie "Zombie Dog, Zombie, ZombieWall, etc." it will totally confuse the hell out of people who play the game. Really? I strongly doubt that. Being 26 and on my way to having my first kid, for sure I do accept the reality that he will eventually be playing games as well, so I truly hope that he/she will be able to gain some sort of an educational bonus out of it. Not my kid waking up asking for zombie cereals for breafast cause gaming companies are too afraid to put words that contain more than two syllables in their products.
2. On the Mongrel balance issue, I think I would be a little bit on both sides of the debate. I do agree that passive skills have the option of being altered with runes, therefore making the "Mongrel Empowerment" more interesting.
However I also believe that a game cannot solely be built upon passives. It would remove too much from gameplay. This is an Action RPG, action being the prominent word. Making most skills passive would kind of make the whole genre redundant.
But I do realize that I haven't played the game for ccountless hours like the folks at Blizzard have, and that I don't have the designing knowledge that they do. So I can only speculate. I do hope they can find a way to keep this game function and develop on it further since it seemed quite interesting.
I also do agree with others that Blizzard doesn't seem to putting enough effort in maintaining the old Zombie Dog's fire and poison system as it seemed to me to be a really good idea on paper. Plus, people on this forum seem to have good ideas for how the system can be made to work so I don't understand why Blizzard can't figure something out.
I'm glad this issue isn't a big part of the game though, that's for sure.
Something I really liked about the WD is that he interacts with his pets. Really, cast a buff on the dog is a much better idea then just put a skill that adds the damage passively. I hope they replace it with some other skills to buff your pet or have some control over then. Just summon then damn dogs and watch then tank stuff is lame.
Passive and automatic effects adds to little to the gameplay, they should keep that in mind.
They also mentioned that with the idea of Voodoo influencing the Witch Doctor's design, it makes more sense to use the word Zombie. Perhaps Zombie Mongrel?
Personally, I've never been impressed with skill names such as Teeth, Jab, or Find Potion. And yet, Diablo II endured.
So? It could still sound better.
That, sir, is a good point.
However, those were in the olden days of computer gaming, so I believe that the community has long forgiven Blizzard for it's past sins.;)
Hopefully they will catch the drift without it having to become a petition....lol:confused:
WE WANT MONGRELS! SAY NO TO ZOMBIES!
Barbarian Spins, Earthquake Hit, Magical Beam...etc..
So, please blizzard rethink about this change.
Be careful what you wish for.
Although this name issue is rediculously unimportant to the gameplay of D3, the more I think about it the more I am baffled at Blizzard's lack of originality in thinking up such neaderthal terminology for a game who's player base fidelity rests in the 20-30 age group.
It's just freakin' ludicrous.
ME WANNA MOORE ZOMBY DOGSES!:confused:
If blizzard think the design is great and it is their "own universe", they can keep the name and the design.
Or, am I looking at the wrong picture? lol, I certainly hope so.
Lolz... that's right.... what is blizzard thinking?
"Wizard Dissappear" sounds good too, blizzard.