183 replies to this topic

[brx]

ruksak, on 19 January 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

Polrayne, on 18 January 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

I do not think that the issues with itemization, the RMAH, poor legendary items at release are totally his fault. These things were designed with a clear path of intent - profit.  And profit means Corporate.  That came from the Powers That Be and it was his job to implement them in the most engaging and fun way possible.

Is it possible for you to qualify this remark? As in, why would items need be designed the way they are for profit? Didn't the vast illicit item market for D2 show that style of itemization sold rather well?

Show me the correlation between D3's itemization and the RMAH model and how the two were made for each other?

Again, the RMAH offends some people in a way that brings cause for them to blame the RMAH for poor itemization.

I have been thinking about it and in my opinion it really comes does to dumbed down=more player=more money.

Of course this is assuming they know what they are doing, and I can't come up with anything else that would explain why the itemisation is so horrendous, except something along the lines of incompetence. They must have a pretty bad opinion of their player base to dumbing down that low, instead of giving real depth and interesting mechanics and theory crafting, but what do I know:p

[CultofPersonality]

What the guy above me said.

[ruksak]

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

I have been thinking about it and in my opinion it really comes does to dumbed down=more player=more money.

Of course this is assuming they know what they are doing, and I can't come up with anything else that would explain why the itemisation is so horrendous, except something along the lines of incompetence. They must have a pretty bad opinion of their player base to dumbing down that low, instead of giving real depth and interesting mechanics and theory crafting, but what do I know:p

How is itemization "dumber" than in D2?

I know it is not as dynamic, with concern toward the spectrum of effects, but how is it "dumb"....or simple?

I am actually starting to feel as if they were being careful to not launch with way too many OP items. Instead, they would rather embellish items later as opposed to having to nerf items down the road because they launched them too powerfully.


I suppose what I'm saying is that I don't see D3 items as "dumbed down". Rather, I see them as simplified with intent to evolve, so to speak. Is there a difference?

Edited by ruksak, 19 January 2013 - 08:18 AM.

[Melt]

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

ruksak, on 19 January 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

Polrayne, on 18 January 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

I do not think that the issues with itemization, the RMAH, poor legendary items at release are totally his fault. These things were designed with a clear path of intent - profit.  And profit means Corporate.  That came from the Powers That Be and it was his job to implement them in the most engaging and fun way possible.

Is it possible for you to qualify this remark? As in, why would items need be designed the way they are for profit? Didn't the vast illicit item market for D2 show that style of itemization sold rather well?

Show me the correlation between D3's itemization and the RMAH model and how the two were made for each other?

Again, the RMAH offends some people in a way that brings cause for them to blame the RMAH for poor itemization.

I have been thinking about it and in my opinion it really comes does to dumbed down=more player=more money.

Of course this is assuming they know what they are doing, and I can't come up with anything else that would explain why the itemisation is so horrendous, except something along the lines of incompetence. They must have a pretty bad opinion of their player base to dumbing down that low, instead of giving real depth and interesting mechanics and theory crafting, but what do I know:p

The base of the product has to be simple to appeal to the broadest audience possible. The first addon will appeal to the persons that still stay with this game and want more. And the 2nd Addon is goign to be designed entirely around creating a game that lasts for the next 10 years to those that are still dedicated to this game.

If you start a game that only appeals to 100.000 people to begin with you probably are going to lose another 50.000 when the first addon hits and another 40.000 when the second addon hits. That's why you can't start with a passive skill tree that fills up 10 screens. If you start to build up that concept in an addon you are NEVER going to be able to appeal to new players.


The base D3 doesn't have to be designes as long lasting as the first addon and the second addon is going to go entirely by the "fuck newcomers, entertain veterans" premise.

[brx]

Melt, on 19 January 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

The base of the product has to be simple to appeal to the broadest audience possible. The first addon will appeal to the persons that still stay with this game and want more. And the 2nd Addon is goign to be designed entirely around creating a game that lasts for the next 10 years to those that are still dedicated to this game.

If you start a game that only appeals to 100.000 people to begin with you probably are going to lose another 50.000 when the first addon hits and another 40.000 when the second addon hits. That's why you can't start with a passive skill tree that fills up 10 screens. If you start to build up that concept in an addon you are NEVER going to be able to appeal to new players.


The base D3 doesn't have to be designes as long lasting as the first addon and the second addon is going to go entirely by the "fuck newcomers, entertain veterans" premise.

see you are the one persuaded it has to be like this, that newcomers do not like depth in their game and that veterans are mean people that blizzard should prevent from hurting everyone etc etc. I am not buying it. Look at the state of game seriously.

@ruksak: idk stack main stat, vita, +damage +crit +ias +all resist. on every slot. for every class. meh that is bland. Everything on weapon damage, no point in elemental damage, all stun blind freeze etc proc are the same. It is straight out of wow.
D2 had +skills at least.

Edited by brx, 19 January 2013 - 08:59 AM.

[ruksak]

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

@ruksak: idk stack main stat, vita, +damage +crit +ias +all resist. on every slot. for every class. meh that is bland. Everything on weapon damage, no point in elemental damage, all stun blind freeze etc proc are the same. It is straight out of wow.

Would seem to be a good starting place. From here, they can take this itemization template and expand upon it greatly, as I'm sure we will see. Taking a look at how D2 was approached, we saw a very similar tactic of grooming itemization from a framework into something truly dynamic (D2 @ launch ~ D2 after LoD).

Where to go from here though?

What would make the current static line of attributes flourish?

I think it's rather simple, at least in general terms. New attributes are needed. What those attributes could be is quite limitless. We'll have to wait and see what they cook up. Point being, I simply cannot fathom that we'll revisit this issue in, for example, 2014. By then, the vanilla flavor we were offered at launch will be long forgotten.

[brx]

ruksak, on 19 January 2013 - 10:04 AM, said:

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

@ruksak: idk stack main stat, vita, +damage +crit +ias +all resist. on every slot. for every class. meh that is bland. Everything on weapon damage, no point in elemental damage, all stun blind freeze etc proc are the same. It is straight out of wow.

Would seem to be a good starting place. From here, they can take this itemization template and expand upon it greatly, as I'm sure we will see. Taking a look at how D2 was approached, we saw a very similar tactic of grooming itemization from a framework into something truly dynamic (D2 @ launch ~ D2 after LoD).

Where to go from here though?

What would make the current static line of attributes flourish?

I think it's rather simple, at least in general terms. New attributes are needed. What those attributes could be is quite limitless. We'll have to wait and see what they cook up. Point being, I simply cannot fathom that we'll revisit this issue in, for example, 2014. By then, the vanilla flavor we were offered at launch will be long forgotten.

I don't think we need more stats but maybe we need to have 4 stats that mean something for all the classes. An old school Dex boosts crit chance and evade, Str boosts physical dmg, Int boosts spells/elemental damage and magic resists, Vit boosts health and physical def etc etc. maybe not exactly that but something along this concept. Then all thoses stats should dissapear from equipement (except maybe on rings and amulets, possibly weapons). Then they bring back the scaling of some skills without weapons damage, then...wait, one can dream, it will probably never happen and it's a shame.

Edited by brx, 19 January 2013 - 11:57 AM.

[cw30000]

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

ruksak, on 19 January 2013 - 10:04 AM, said:

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

@ruksak: idk stack main stat, vita, +damage +crit +ias +all resist. on every slot. for every class. meh that is bland. Everything on weapon damage, no point in elemental damage, all stun blind freeze etc proc are the same. It is straight out of wow.

Would seem to be a good starting place. From here, they can take this itemization template and expand upon it greatly, as I'm sure we will see. Taking a look at how D2 was approached, we saw a very similar tactic of grooming itemization from a framework into something truly dynamic (D2 @ launch ~ D2 after LoD).

Where to go from here though?

What would make the current static line of attributes flourish?

I think it's rather simple, at least in general terms. New attributes are needed. What those attributes could be is quite limitless. We'll have to wait and see what they cook up. Point being, I simply cannot fathom that we'll revisit this issue in, for example, 2014. By then, the vanilla flavor we were offered at launch will be long forgotten.

I don't think we need more stats but maybe we need to have 4 stats that mean something for all the classes. An old school Dex boosts crit chance and evade, Str boosts physical dmg, Int boosts spells/elemental damage and magic resists, Vit boosts health and physical def etc etc. maybe not exactly that but something along this concept. Then all thoses stats should dissapear from equipement (except maybe on rings and amulets, possibly weapons). Then they bring back the scaling of some skills without weapons damage, then...wait, one can dream, it will probably never happen and it's a shame.

We need to trash the whole system and start something new in D3 expansion. Instead of call it D3 exapnsion, just call it D4. Seriously, stats from items is stupid.

[ruksak]

cw30000, on 19 January 2013 - 12:54 PM, said:

We need to trash the whole system and start something new in D3 expansion. Instead of call it D3 exapnsion, just call it D4. Seriously, stats from items is stupid.

Nah....not necessary. If they went with your idea I would suggest calling it Diablo 2.1

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

I don't think we need more stats but maybe we need to have 4 stats that mean something for all the classes. An old school Dex boosts crit chance and evade, Str boosts physical dmg, Int boosts spells/elemental damage and magic resists, Vit boosts health and physical def etc etc. maybe not exactly that but something along this concept. Then all thoses stats should dissapear from equipement (except maybe on rings and amulets, possibly weapons). Then they bring back the scaling of some skills without weapons damage, then...wait, one can dream, it will probably never happen and it's a shame.

I would look for tweaks such as; Allowing people to assign stat points as they see fit as opposed to the current system of automatically assigned stat points upon each level up. Doing so we could see such things as monks with 10k armor or 100k life. To reach such goals one would have to sacrifice from other areas. Thus creating diversity, unusual builds and a feeling of control for the player.

From what I gather, Blizz is attempting to have customization come from how items affect skills. This avenue has a great deal of potential. As it is, items are all going towards the same handful of attributes.

Edited by ruksak, 19 January 2013 - 01:23 PM.

[brx]

ruksak, on 19 January 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

From what I gather, Blizz is attempting to have customization come from how items affect skills. This avenue has a great deal of potential. As it is, items are all going towards the same handful of attributes.

what do you mean? Because if you are refering to offhands '+9% damage with _" I think they should not bother staying on that path.

[ruksak]

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 02:39 PM, said:

ruksak, on 19 January 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

From what I gather, Blizz is attempting to have customization come from how items affect skills. This avenue has a great deal of potential. As it is, items are all going towards the same handful of attributes.

what do you mean? Because if you are refering to offhands '+9% damage with _" I think they should not bother staying on that path.

Yes, that is what I was referring to.

+10% to Sweeping Winds etc.

Though I admit, as is, these affixes are underwhelming and do not go well enough into the realm of customization. But....I feel this is the right idea, only it need be more dynamic.

Much of the reason for this is....they're all DPS related and to my knowledge, none of them address defensive capabilities. How about a helm that offers +% to Mantras for Monks, which could be used for Evasion rune (for example)? With PvP looming, players are going to have to adjust and become far more defensive minded.

I think the solution is to offer people a hard choice that may bring cause for them to not use a 6% CC Mempo. Instead, the advantages of other affixes may outweigh the need for straight crit whoring.

[Kblavkalash]

If you guys noticed, Jay Wilson's twitter says "

Game Director @ Blizzard on an unannounced game.

".

So i have a feeling that he wasn't fired from D3, maybe it was his choice to move to other position, prolly he got enough of D3? I doubt someone would fire a guy from game director's position because of bad work just to put him into another game director's position at another game.

[Bagstone]

What? No one ever said he was fired. He decided to move on, and it's also kind of obvious - maintaining/improving a game is a different task then designing/developing a new one. Even though all the haters here say he's unable to do so, JW and the Blizzard folks think he's more useful when it comes to getting the basic foundations of Titan (the unannounced game) right.

[overneathe]

Kblavkalash, on 19 January 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

If you guys noticed, Jay Wilson's twitter says "

Game Director @ Blizzard on an unannounced game.

".

So i have a feeling that he wasn't fired from D3, maybe it was his choice to move to other position, prolly he got enough of D3? I doubt someone would fire a guy from game director's position because of bad work just to put him into another game director's position at another game.

It was most likely a mutual but necessary decision on both parts.

[shaggy]

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

Melt, on 19 January 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

The base of the product has to be simple to appeal to the broadest audience possible. The first addon will appeal to the persons that still stay with this game and want more. And the 2nd Addon is goign to be designed entirely around creating a game that lasts for the next 10 years to those that are still dedicated to this game.

If you start a game that only appeals to 100.000 people to begin with you probably are going to lose another 50.000 when the first addon hits and another 40.000 when the second addon hits. That's why you can't start with a passive skill tree that fills up 10 screens. If you start to build up that concept in an addon you are NEVER going to be able to appeal to new players.


The base D3 doesn't have to be designes as long lasting as the first addon and the second addon is going to go entirely by the "fuck newcomers, entertain veterans" premise.

see you are the one persuaded it has to be like this, that newcomers do not like depth in their game and that veterans are mean people that blizzard should prevent from hurting everyone etc etc. I am not buying it. Look at the state of game seriously.

@ruksak: idk stack main stat, vita, +damage +crit +ias +all resist. on every slot. for every class. meh that is bland. Everything on weapon damage, no point in elemental damage, all stun blind freeze etc proc are the same. It is straight out of wow.
D2 had +skills at least.

What I disagree with is that your ideal D2 item had basically all the same stats on it too:

+skills
+all stats
+life leech
+mana leech (albeit less mandatory than life leech)
+resistances
+magic find

Yes, you could cap resistances, and yes a lot of people wanted faster block, hit recovery, and attack, but ultimately the "good item" archetype in D2 was 4 or 5 affixes that were near-mandatory.  The only thing that truly has changed in D3 is which stats we are stacking.  In D3 primary stats are most closely akin to +skills, as they both were across-the-board damage increases.  We can't really "stack" life leech anymore, but that's counterbalanced by the fact that we can stack resistances as high as we want.

I don't know.  Perhaps I'm completely off my rocker, but I just don't see any huge differences D3 and D2 in the "I'm just stacking X number of stats" category.  To me it's the exact same shit just with a different name therefore I really have trouble getting on board with the overused "dumbed down" argument.

D2 wasn't exactly a paragon of complexity.  Games don't need to be ultra complex to be fun.  In fact most of the successful games are, in all acutality, newbie-friendly.  Why?  Because it's not fun to play Solitaire all the time, sometimes it's fun to play a game with other people.  If you want others to play then you have to acknowledge that they all have varying skill levels, attention spans, etc.  As a complete aside, almost every game in the "bullet hell" genre is strikingly simple to learn but difficult to master - like Go.

I met a ton of people in D2.  People I still communicate with to this very day.  The reason I did that was because it was accessible.  If anything D3 has accessibility issues because it's EASIER to ignore public games (for a myriad of reasons) and not "trust" that you can have fun with others in a game.  Everything is about uberefficiency and the risk of doing the social thing is vastly outweighed by the efficiency tradeoffs.  That is a problem that the community has largely imposed on itself.

Edited by shaggy, 19 January 2013 - 07:00 PM.

[Bagstone]

Thank you shaggy. Thank you very much for pointing this out. I think a lot of people are romanticizing over D2 items - what's main stat on D3 items, was +skill level on D2 items. There are some differences in itemization, and some problems that need to be solved, but nothing "unfixable" imho. The lack of interesting variety of legendaries is one of the big differences (just consider the lack of ANY good shoulders, because let's face it, besides rares and the super-ugly Vile Ward there are NONE in D3). And this is something that can and will be fixed in the future - either in one of the next patches or definitely in the expansion. And the expansion is what fixed many issues in D2, too (something that many people seem to have forgotten).

[yoshiboi]

shaggy, on 19 January 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

brx, on 19 January 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

Melt, on 19 January 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

The base of the product has to be simple to appeal to the broadest audience possible. The first addon will appeal to the persons that still stay with this game and want more. And the 2nd Addon is goign to be designed entirely around creating a game that lasts for the next 10 years to those that are still dedicated to this game.

If you start a game that only appeals to 100.000 people to begin with you probably are going to lose another 50.000 when the first addon hits and another 40.000 when the second addon hits. That's why you can't start with a passive skill tree that fills up 10 screens. If you start to build up that concept in an addon you are NEVER going to be able to appeal to new players.


The base D3 doesn't have to be designes as long lasting as the first addon and the second addon is going to go entirely by the "fuck newcomers, entertain veterans" premise.

see you are the one persuaded it has to be like this, that newcomers do not like depth in their game and that veterans are mean people that blizzard should prevent from hurting everyone etc etc. I am not buying it. Look at the state of game seriously.

@ruksak: idk stack main stat, vita, +damage +crit +ias +all resist. on every slot. for every class. meh that is bland. Everything on weapon damage, no point in elemental damage, all stun blind freeze etc proc are the same. It is straight out of wow.
D2 had +skills at least.

What I disagree with is that your ideal D2 item had basically all the same stats on it too:

+skills
+all stats
+life leech
+mana leech (albeit less mandatory than life leech)
+resistances
+magic find

Yes, you could cap resistances, and yes a lot of people wanted faster block, hit recovery, and attack, but ultimately the "good item" archetype in D2 was 4 or 5 affixes that were near-mandatory.  The only thing that truly has changed in D3 is which stats we are stacking.  In D3 primary stats are most closely akin to +skills, as they both were across-the-board damage increases.  We can't really "stack" life leech anymore, but that's counterbalanced by the fact that we can stack resistances as high as we want.

I don't know.  Perhaps I'm completely off my rocker, but I just don't see any huge differences D3 and D2 in the "I'm just stacking X number of stats" category.  To me it's the exact same shit just with a different name therefore I really have trouble getting on board with the overused "dumbed down" argument.

D2 wasn't exactly a paragon of complexity.  Games don't need to be ultra complex to be fun.  In fact most of the successful games are, in all acutality, newbie-friendly.  Why?  Because it's not fun to play Solitaire all the time, sometimes it's fun to play a game with other people.  If you want others to play then you have to acknowledge that they all have varying skill levels, attention spans, etc.

I met a ton of people in D2.  People I still communicate with to this very day.  The reason I did that was because it was accessible.  If anything D3 has accessibility issues because it's EASIER to ignore public games (for a myriad of reasons) and not "trust" that you can have fun with others in a game.  Everything is about uberefficiency and the risk of doing the social thing is vastly outweighed by the efficiency tradeoffs.

ummmm have you even played D2? Why do I see so many posts of people trying to compare D2 and D3 yet they have no idea how both work. Ya sure D2 was far from perfect but there was build diversity. People didnt just stack one Godly stat, they combined other ones as well. I used to have 3 of each class, all different powerhouse specs. Ya obviously we are using affixes on items like D3 does...but there was synergy between gear and skill points. Now in D3 technically all your gear is useless unless your main weapon is godly. There is 0 build diversity....unless you want your hero to be extremely weak and fall behind everyone else farming.

Why does a game have to be EZ mode for a 5year old boy for it to be fun? This is the year 2013....what happened to humans evolving?!?! It's kinda sad that this is the direction we are headed.

[Bagstone]

yoshiboi, on 19 January 2013 - 07:03 PM, said:

ummmm have you even played D2? Why do I see so many posts of people trying to compare D2 and D3 yet they have no idea how both work. Ya sure D2 was far from perfect but there was build diversity. People didnt just stack one Godly stat, they combined other ones as well. I used to have 3 of each class, all different powerhouse specs. Ya obviously we are using affixes on items like D3 does...but there was synergy between gear and skill points. Now in D3 technically all your gear is useless unless your main weapon is godly. There is 0 build diversity....unless you want your hero to be extremely weak and fall behind everyone else farming.

Why does a game have to be EZ mode for a 5year old boy for it to be fun? This is the year 2013....what happened to humans evolving?!?! It's kinda sad that this is the direction we are headed.

I'm seriously getting a bit sick of reading this over and over again.

Sure, it was possible in D2; but to some extent it's also possible in D3. Just look at the wizard forums where some people occasionally develop new builds or play with something that's completely different than the usual CMWW/Archon cookie cutter builds (and as a result, require different gear, sometimes even make use of the completely ridiculous items like Frostburn gloves). HOWEVER, the big difference is that in D2 these people were praised and the builds tried out by other people ("this looks so much fun!" "I'm gonna try this!"), while in D3 everybody rides the efficiency train ("this is crap because I'll lose 2.5 million XP/hour", "switch spell X to Archon and spell Y to CM otherwise this won't work", etc.).

Yes, the lack of legendaries that have unique stats like the unique items in D2 makes it harder, but it's not impossible to do something different. The main problem, however, seems to be that in D3 everything is just about efficiency, efficiency, efficiency - and nothing else. I haven't seen a thread in recent weeks about a really new and interesting build, but there are tons of threads about the most efficient route for max XP or loot per hour farming. I don't recall that this was as prevalent in D2 as it is now in D3.

Edited by Bagstone, 19 January 2013 - 07:16 PM.

[shaggy]

yoshiboi, on 19 January 2013 - 07:03 PM, said:

Why does a game have to be EZ mode for a 5year old boy for it to be fun? This is the year 2013....what happened to humans evolving?!?! It's kinda sad that this is the direction we are headed.

If that's what you got from my post then you didn't read my post at all.

Try again.

[Stephenk291]

if you guys think ground breaking changes are going to make it before the expansion you're wrong. If anything just bide your time till the expansion and hope for some better changes.