Besides the absence of the necromancer (hands down the funnest character to play in D2, period, and the absurdly lame Witch Doctor doesn't count), my biggest disappointment with D3 is the downsize of online player capacity from 8 to 4.
I just simply don't understand this decision at all. A 4 players limit????!!!!! This doesn't even incorporate a party with all 5 characters!!! Not to mention more characters will undoubted come out with expansion packs (we all know it will be coming). In the realm of online gaming, 99% of the time, more is merrier. One of the best fun to be had on D2 was to fight high level bosses with a full 8 men party: A spectacular chaotic mosaic of spells and martial arts moves and explosions against the minions of hell ensured. To me, reducing 8 to 4 is the equivalent of having 50% less fun to be had. 4 men doesn't feel like a party, it feels like a pathetic little squad of loners with no friends.
Speaking of friends, I was extremely excited to be playing D3 with the enhanced Battle.net 2.0, one of the biggest frustrations on D2 was not being able to communicate with online friends outside of the game at all because of the limitations of the then Battle.net 1.0. Unfortunately Blizzard just had to shoot down my excitement as I learned that I can only play with 3 other friends at any one time......
I just utterly fail to understand the reason behind this decision from a gameplay standpoint.
Besides the absence of the necromancer (hands down the funnest character to play in D2, period, and the absurdly lame Witch Doctor doesn't count), my biggest disappointment with D3 is the downsize of online player capacity from 8 to 4.
I just simply don't understand this decision at all. A 4 players limit????!!!!! This doesn't even incorporate a party with all 5 characters!!! Not to mention more characters will undoubted come out with expansion packs (we all know it will be coming). In the realm of online gaming, 99% of the time, more is merrier. One of the best fun to be had on D2 was to fight high level bosses with a full 8 men party: A spectacular chaotic mosaic of spells and martial arts moves and explosions against the minions of hell ensured. To me, reducing 8 to 4 is the equivalent of having 50% less fun to be had. 4 men doesn't feel like a party, it feels like a pathetic little squad of loners with no friends.
Speaking of friends, I was extremely excited to be playing D3 with the enhanced Battle.net 2.0, one of the biggest frustrations on D2 was not being able to communicate with online friends outside of the game at all because of the limitations of the then Battle.net 1.0. Unfortunately Blizzard just had to shoot down my excitement as I learned that I can only play with 3 other friends at any one time......
I just utterly fail to understand the reason behind this decision from a gameplay standpoint.
Has Blizzard ever explained the reason?
There are quite a few threads about this already. And the witch doctor looks pretty cool tbh, so let's wait and see how it plays out before holding a pity party. If you still don't like it upon release, try again.
I'm a necro player and looking how messy is the screen when you have 11 skeletons, 5 skeleton mages, 7 revives, 1 golem, 1 hireling, all of them cursed while you are mobbed by the enemies, all of them obviously cursed too, and you are shooting FCR Bone Spirits and spamming some corpse explosions while in SP, not to mention if you have party members.....well, 4 instead of 8 seems fair.
When I first heard about the 4 player cap when they first announced it? ya I got my panties in a bunch,
but I quickly saw the upsides of it, and will be ok with it
but I think the most disappointing things is how they butchered the followers, and this new 20 point skill cap I recently heard about
so its awesome and they want to keep the more co-op style, but i see it as just impractical for the game 2 have it capped at 4. i don't like it at all. 8 was a good number. regardless of cap i would like 2 solo normal at least, and then play with my mates for the rest. i don't want 1 to be left out because of the cap. I get what there saying but its still dumb.
A lot of you reply with the argument that "This was what Blizzard came up with as the most optimum and fun gaming experience".
But why should we let Blizzard spoon feed us into deciding "what's the most fun"? Why should we let Blizzard determine for us how exactly we should play our games?
We should be given the option to have at least 8 players in an online game to preserve that tradition from D2. If some players are against having too much spell effects and pixel mess on the screen, then let them have the option to limit the player vacancy slots in their games. If some players like me wish to have the same 8 men chaotic gameplay from D2, let us have that option too!!!
A lot of you reply with the argument that "This was what Blizzard came up with as the most optimum and fun gaming experience".
But why should we let Blizzard spoon feed us into deciding "what's the most fun"? Why should we let Blizzard determine for us how exactly we should play our games?
We should be given the option to have at least 8 players in an online game to preserve that tradition from D2. If some players are against having too much spell effects and pixel mess on the screen, then let them have the option to limit the player vacancy slots in their games. If some players like me wish to have the same 8 men chaotic gameplay from D2, let us have that option too!!!
You do have choices with how many people to play with. Just instead of 1-8 its 1-4.
Blizzard is a company that makes games. They know far more about it than most(if not all) of us. Many good reasons were given in the linked thread above.
Then don't buy the game, no one is forcing you to. It might seem a bit harsh, but if Blizzard truly thought it would add that many more customers for what they perceive to be inferior in their game they would have done it anyway, the 8 player cap that is.
Also, games try to set a certain mood, Blizzard doesn't think that's possible with 8 players running rampant arround the screen with mobs a lot stronger then they would be otherwise. Every mob you encounter in a game balanced for 8 players would be like a pretty damn powerfull hero instead, which doesn't really help with how they see the game.(well, in my interpretation of their words)
"Then don't buy the game." I don't think you have the right to speak for Blizzard on their behalves.
If Blizzard is being interviewed by a mainstream video game media on regards to some controversial designing choices in the game (no Talisman, 4 player cap, etc), will Blizzard's reply to the question be, "If you don't like it, then don't buy the game."??
No.
Blizzard will defend to the death of why they made the choice, they will claim and boast of how much consideration and calculations they had undertaken to make that choice, and try their hardest to convince readers of that interview that the choice they made was for the best.
Why?
Because Blizzard is a business, and Diablo 3 is their product. Every prospect customer matters, especially ones that had been loyal to the series for over a decade. Those are the people that made the Diablo brand name what it is today. And from doing some research on the internet, I'm definitely not the only one who is discontent with the 4 player cap.
So please, don't speak for Blizzard on their behalves and tell people who are not satisfied with the game's development "If you don't like it, don't buy the game."
It's disrespectful to Blizzard, and I'm 100% certain Blizzard will not be happy that you are discouraging and pushing away their potential revenues.
Yes, they will defend it, you know why? Because they think it works better then an 8 player cap. And that's perfectly fine. I take it you see blizzards stance on the matter now? I take it you do from that post, even if you don't completely agree with it.
I'm trying to look at it from both sides, as such I look at what blizzard has said and say how I interpret it, which is what I said before. I wasn't quite clear with the "If you don't like it, then don't guy the game." and should have said: "If this isn't the type of game you're looking for because you want to play with more people, then play WoW." Because apparently, I need to be a fanboy to be able to give either a positive or negative opinion on anything.
But I digress, you're right that I don't have the right to speak on Blizzards behalf, it's why I said "(well, in my interpretation of their words)".
I'm not siding with Blizzard, I'm just simply disgusted with people who tell anyone who criticizes a game in any way "Then don't buy the game, no one is forcing you to".
To those people I want to tell them: "Well if you don't like the negatives I have to say about the game, then don't reply to it, no one is forcing you to. You replying or not does not benefit me in any way. Unlike the company who made the game, who will benefit from me purchasing their game."
And yes I do want to hear Blizzard's official statement in this matter. Because as of yet none of the player given answers are even remotely convincing enough for me (8 players are too messy, too much going on screen, imbalanced, will cause lag, PC can't handle it, etc, etc). To each and every one of these answers in defending the 4 player limit, I can provide much sounder arguments of how the previous 8 players cap would not affect it negatively in any way.
So really I just hope someone can provide a link to Blizzard's official statement to this 4 player cap matter, but seems like Blizzard hasn't made one yet.
Stop comparing diablo 3 with diablo 2 .... Diablo 3 is NOT Diablo 2, it's the biggest mistake people do..... Look at it as a BRAND new game instead, if you wanna go with 8 players and play D2, then go and play D2...
Besides, they reasoned the 4 player cap with the fact that it was the most balanced amount of players, over 4 seemed too chaotic, and your hero would feel inferior coz you either died so quick that the mobs would 1 shot you, or everything died so fast that your hero felt like he wasn't needed..
This is actually a very good way to put it. If D3 is indeed a brand new game with no connections at all with D2, it's likely I will be able to overlook its online 4 player cap.
Nevertheless Diablo 3 is carrying the Diablo brand name, and it is explicitly announcing itself to be its direct sequel. Therefore telling anyone not to make comparisons between D3 and its direct predecessors is utterly impossible. If Blizzard did not want people to make those comparisons, then D3 should have been relabeled as a brand new IP and remains merely as Diablo's spiritual successor.
I don't buy the "balancing issue" argument either. D2 had 8 players and its multiplayer balance looked perfectly fine to me. Personally I have never heard of anyone who complained of 8 players Hell in D2 as being too difficult or too easy. If you find 8 men to be too difficult because monsters are buffed too much? Then limit your game to 5 players only, or even 2.
My bottom line is, players should be given the option to play the game the way they want. People are diverse and our definitions of fun inevitably differ. Thus developers should give us more options to cater our game to our own individual desires, and not bluntly restrict the available in-game options and force us to play the game the way THEY want us to.
After all, we are the players, they are merely the ones trying to please us.
So really I just hope someone can provide a link to Blizzard's official statement to this 4 player cap matter, but seems like Blizzard hasn't made one yet.
But I have to say I am dearly disappointed......this must be one of the worst defenses they can think of for the 4 player cap.
"Readability", seriously?
Shouldn't players be the ones to decide if they wish more or less "readability"? Why is Blizzard holding our throats and forcing us to stare at their effects, explosions, monsters, etc, if all some of us want is good ol' D2 chaotic fun?
"Readability"?
D3 online PvP provides 6 players games with spells, effects, explosions, abilities being "spammed" constantly every second, and I don't see anyone complain about "readability".
The following text is not a direct reply to you btw, just my general thoughts...
People need to stop acting like they know things about something they haven't experienced. Nobody has played the retail game, yet people act like they just know that a 8 player cap is better. Wondering about and questioning decisions is one thing, acting all like "I want the game to be like this and therefor it should be that way" is totally different.
People, especially fans of the series, can and should be given some say in some specified areas of the development of the game, within reason. All we want is to preserve the tradition of 8 players from D2, which I personally think is a perfectly justifiable and reasonable demand. We are not demanding a 50 player cap or something of absurdity.
Who are we kidding. None of us have more than four friends. Right guys?
You mean 3. Unless you count yourself as your friend who you confide in and hang out with when you are lonely In that case you are better off making friends with a psychiatrist.
I just hope that bliz have put this to a REAL world scenario/test when they decided on the 4 player limit. Of course if you do consider 8 people who have never played the game before, they will all stick together and play the game properly with teamwork, i.e they will play the game as bliz intended.
But look at a real scenario. In d2 you make a game called "Diablo for quest" looking to get some help with killing D. 6 people will join the game, 1 of them will go and MF on meph, 1 of them will use your game to transfer items to another character by hiding their items and coming back, another player will do a quest/run totally unrelated to what you wanted but just wanted a full game for drops/xp, another player joins legitimately but is too weak so he spends 80% of the time a few screens away from the main battle to avoid damage. In the end your left with 1 person actually cooperating with you.
Part of me thinks that bliz is being a bit naive when it comes to how things will go down once the game has been out for a while. My experience with d2 (have played on BNET since it was released) is that you need 8 people to join the game to get 2-4 people to PROPERLY cooperate. Although I guess we will never know until the game comes out.
I think all of us WANTS a ~5+ cap on parties, but we have to be realistic and understand that it's too much work. It's better if they release it like this and allow for an extra slot in the expansion or something!
I just hope that bliz have put this to a REAL world scenario/test when they decided on the 4 player limit. Of course if you do consider 8 people who have never played the game before, they will all stick together and play the game properly with teamwork, i.e they will play the game as bliz intended.
But look at a real scenario. In d2 you make a game called "Diablo for quest" looking to get some help with killing D. 6 people will join the game, 1 of them will go and MF on meph, 1 of them will use your game to transfer items to another character by hiding their items and coming back, another player will do a quest/run totally unrelated to what you wanted but just wanted a full game for drops/xp, another player joins legitimately but is too weak so he spends 80% of the time a few screens away from the main battle to avoid damage. In the end your left with 1 person actually cooperating with you.
Part of me thinks that bliz is being a bit naive when it comes to how things will go down once the game has been out for a while. My experience with d2 (have played on BNET since it was released) is that you need 8 people to join the game to get 2-4 people to PROPERLY cooperate. Although I guess we will never know until the game comes out.
This is actually a very good point. I never thought about this.
I just hope that bliz have put this to a REAL world scenario/test when they decided on the 4 player limit. Of course if you do consider 8 people who have never played the game before, they will all stick together and play the game properly with teamwork, i.e they will play the game as bliz intended.
But look at a real scenario. In d2 you make a game called "Diablo for quest" looking to get some help with killing D. 6 people will join the game, 1 of them will go and MF on meph, 1 of them will use your game to transfer items to another character by hiding their items and coming back, another player will do a quest/run totally unrelated to what you wanted but just wanted a full game for drops/xp, another player joins legitimately but is too weak so he spends 80% of the time a few screens away from the main battle to avoid damage. In the end your left with 1 person actually cooperating with you.
Part of me thinks that bliz is being a bit naive when it comes to how things will go down once the game has been out for a while. My experience with d2 (have played on BNET since it was released) is that you need 8 people to join the game to get 2-4 people to PROPERLY cooperate. Although I guess we will never know until the game comes out.
Are you kidding me? 5 of those 6 players will be spam bots.
Diablo 2 was way too easy with 8 players. There was no real difficulty whatsoever. I'd rather have the game as difficult with any sized party instead.
Completely agreed, with 8 players in a game the only challenge was getting to the good drops first. Hell just became a place to farm gear, and had almost nothing to do with being fun and challenging.
“We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about.” - Albert Einstein
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I just simply don't understand this decision at all. A 4 players limit????!!!!! This doesn't even incorporate a party with all 5 characters!!! Not to mention more characters will undoubted come out with expansion packs (we all know it will be coming). In the realm of online gaming, 99% of the time, more is merrier. One of the best fun to be had on D2 was to fight high level bosses with a full 8 men party: A spectacular chaotic mosaic of spells and martial arts moves and explosions against the minions of hell ensured. To me, reducing 8 to 4 is the equivalent of having 50% less fun to be had. 4 men doesn't feel like a party, it feels like a pathetic little squad of loners with no friends.
Speaking of friends, I was extremely excited to be playing D3 with the enhanced Battle.net 2.0, one of the biggest frustrations on D2 was not being able to communicate with online friends outside of the game at all because of the limitations of the then Battle.net 1.0. Unfortunately Blizzard just had to shoot down my excitement as I learned that I can only play with 3 other friends at any one time......
I just utterly fail to understand the reason behind this decision from a gameplay standpoint.
Has Blizzard ever explained the reason?
There are quite a few threads about this already. And the witch doctor looks pretty cool tbh, so let's wait and see how it plays out before holding a pity party. If you still don't like it upon release, try again.
http://www.diablofans.com/topic/25226-player-party-cap/
And close this, thank you.
but I quickly saw the upsides of it, and will be ok with it
but I think the most disappointing things is how they butchered the followers, and this new 20 point skill cap I recently heard about
Thanks Caniroth for the awesome sig!
But why should we let Blizzard spoon feed us into deciding "what's the most fun"? Why should we let Blizzard determine for us how exactly we should play our games?
We should be given the option to have at least 8 players in an online game to preserve that tradition from D2. If some players are against having too much spell effects and pixel mess on the screen, then let them have the option to limit the player vacancy slots in their games. If some players like me wish to have the same 8 men chaotic gameplay from D2, let us have that option too!!!
Blizzard is a company that makes games. They know far more about it than most(if not all) of us. Many good reasons were given in the linked thread above.
"Then don't buy the game." I don't think you have the right to speak for Blizzard on their behalves.
If Blizzard is being interviewed by a mainstream video game media on regards to some controversial designing choices in the game (no Talisman, 4 player cap, etc), will Blizzard's reply to the question be, "If you don't like it, then don't buy the game."??
No.
Blizzard will defend to the death of why they made the choice, they will claim and boast of how much consideration and calculations they had undertaken to make that choice, and try their hardest to convince readers of that interview that the choice they made was for the best.
Why?
Because Blizzard is a business, and Diablo 3 is their product. Every prospect customer matters, especially ones that had been loyal to the series for over a decade. Those are the people that made the Diablo brand name what it is today. And from doing some research on the internet, I'm definitely not the only one who is discontent with the 4 player cap.
So please, don't speak for Blizzard on their behalves and tell people who are not satisfied with the game's development "If you don't like it, don't buy the game."
It's disrespectful to Blizzard, and I'm 100% certain Blizzard will not be happy that you are discouraging and pushing away their potential revenues.
I'm not siding with Blizzard, I'm just simply disgusted with people who tell anyone who criticizes a game in any way "Then don't buy the game, no one is forcing you to".
To those people I want to tell them: "Well if you don't like the negatives I have to say about the game, then don't reply to it, no one is forcing you to. You replying or not does not benefit me in any way. Unlike the company who made the game, who will benefit from me purchasing their game."
And yes I do want to hear Blizzard's official statement in this matter. Because as of yet none of the player given answers are even remotely convincing enough for me (8 players are too messy, too much going on screen, imbalanced, will cause lag, PC can't handle it, etc, etc). To each and every one of these answers in defending the 4 player limit, I can provide much sounder arguments of how the previous 8 players cap would not affect it negatively in any way.
So really I just hope someone can provide a link to Blizzard's official statement to this 4 player cap matter, but seems like Blizzard hasn't made one yet.
This is actually a very good way to put it. If D3 is indeed a brand new game with no connections at all with D2, it's likely I will be able to overlook its online 4 player cap.
Nevertheless Diablo 3 is carrying the Diablo brand name, and it is explicitly announcing itself to be its direct sequel. Therefore telling anyone not to make comparisons between D3 and its direct predecessors is utterly impossible. If Blizzard did not want people to make those comparisons, then D3 should have been relabeled as a brand new IP and remains merely as Diablo's spiritual successor.
I don't buy the "balancing issue" argument either. D2 had 8 players and its multiplayer balance looked perfectly fine to me. Personally I have never heard of anyone who complained of 8 players Hell in D2 as being too difficult or too easy. If you find 8 men to be too difficult because monsters are buffed too much? Then limit your game to 5 players only, or even 2.
My bottom line is, players should be given the option to play the game the way they want. People are diverse and our definitions of fun inevitably differ. Thus developers should give us more options to cater our game to our own individual desires, and not bluntly restrict the available in-game options and force us to play the game the way THEY want us to.
After all, we are the players, they are merely the ones trying to please us.
Thanks a lot for the link.
But I have to say I am dearly disappointed......this must be one of the worst defenses they can think of for the 4 player cap.
"Readability", seriously?
Shouldn't players be the ones to decide if they wish more or less "readability"? Why is Blizzard holding our throats and forcing us to stare at their effects, explosions, monsters, etc, if all some of us want is good ol' D2 chaotic fun?
"Readability"?
D3 online PvP provides 6 players games with spells, effects, explosions, abilities being "spammed" constantly every second, and I don't see anyone complain about "readability".
Honestly, Blizzard, you can do better than this.
People, especially fans of the series, can and should be given some say in some specified areas of the development of the game, within reason. All we want is to preserve the tradition of 8 players from D2, which I personally think is a perfectly justifiable and reasonable demand. We are not demanding a 50 player cap or something of absurdity.
You mean 3. Unless you count yourself as your friend who you confide in and hang out with when you are lonely In that case you are better off making friends with a psychiatrist.
But look at a real scenario. In d2 you make a game called "Diablo for quest" looking to get some help with killing D. 6 people will join the game, 1 of them will go and MF on meph, 1 of them will use your game to transfer items to another character by hiding their items and coming back, another player will do a quest/run totally unrelated to what you wanted but just wanted a full game for drops/xp, another player joins legitimately but is too weak so he spends 80% of the time a few screens away from the main battle to avoid damage. In the end your left with 1 person actually cooperating with you.
Part of me thinks that bliz is being a bit naive when it comes to how things will go down once the game has been out for a while. My experience with d2 (have played on BNET since it was released) is that you need 8 people to join the game to get 2-4 people to PROPERLY cooperate. Although I guess we will never know until the game comes out.
This is actually a very good point. I never thought about this.
Are you kidding me? 5 of those 6 players will be spam bots.
Completely agreed, with 8 players in a game the only challenge was getting to the good drops first. Hell just became a place to farm gear, and had almost nothing to do with being fun and challenging.