I lean Diablo 2 conservative. Though I don't mind changes here and there, as long as they appeal to me.
+ I love the new art direction.
- I really don't like the health globes. Potions all the way for me.
+ Changes in the PvP and other gameplay mechanics seem okay to me so far.
- The intrusive red targeting silhouette from Diablo 1 looks awful to me now.
So kind of a mixed bag, but I tend to prefer Diablo 2's system.
However, if you have designed or saw someone doing the math of a game once in your life, you will kno that give the player the power to choose stuff like his HP, dmg, etc.. is dangerous when you are aiming for a ACTION oriented game.
I've played plenty of games that had balanced races, which all had different max stats. If they can figure out how to balance various races in a way that they all have uses, I'm sure its not nearly as hard to balance 4? stats.
Look at a game like guild wars even. They didn't auto assign your attribute points, you could assign them into anything you wanted, and anyone you asked about how to make a particular class would have their own formula they swore by.
And the best way to people achieve that is by trading what others need for stuff you need.
Except I will no longer be able to do this with any of my good items because I corrupted them by trying them out apparently. Placing more restrictions on trading, is not a free market design.
And how gold synchs would increase grinding time ?
Whats a synch in a game...basically a way to destroy currency. If they make repairing equipment a huge synch, then you waste a ton of time grinding gold to keep your gear in top top shape. If you have to buy food for your character becuase he gets hungry, what is this...a gold synch. You have to spend time grinding gold to buy food. Syncs are all about increasing time spent grinding, why do you think pay per play mmos have so many? For someone who knows the math of game design, I'd hope you know how synchs work:P
Just accept the fact that this person also want to do that with you and take the risk like a man.
There's plenty of risk to pk, I've killed plenty of pk'ers, and been killed on plenty of pk attempts. Theres elements of alertness, risk, and a bit of thrill present when more random pk is present, that are not present in arena only systems.
I get more of a rush being in a baal game when a pk'er joins then running ubers or any other area.
There's simply no difference whether character customization is done by items or stats and items.
Put a stormshield on a character with the right amount of dex, and you get 75% block. Put a stormshield on a character with no dex and you get what like 20% block? They also tend to have fairly significant hp differences as well. I see a difference.
About economy, I've no patience to explain more about the fact slight inflation makes the system very healthy. It's just a case of some basic economics. Slight being not all-that-radical. A per cent per month, maybe. It's pretty simple fact to keep in mind and I'm sure Blizzard have consulted an economist at least briefly. All current signs show that they take their economy seriously.
1% a month inflation or deflation wouldnt really matter at all, but it doesnt happen this way in games, especially if they're getting rid of ladder. However what happens in all constantly running games with a currency, the longer you play, the more you horde, the higher the amount of gold you must have to be rich and afford top end things. When it first started if you had a few thousand fg you were the man, now people have 80,000fg, so your 2k is pennies. If you havent been consistently playing and hording the entire time your left behind.
Syns or no syncs, its totally irrelevant. Your effecting everyone equally with them, so your slowing the rate of saving, and doing nothing against hording. After the games been around a while getting wealthy in it is like trying to live today getting paid a wage from 1920.
Did you ever stop and think for a minute, that D2 is one of the most long running and popular rpgs to date, and also one of the only rpg's to date that was more barter based then currency based? If you have a successful deviation of the norm why mainstream, why not just improve on one of the differences that contributed to success?
PK'ers are a minority. The good of majority goes before the good of minority. A totally different server might be an option, but once again, it's extra work for the good of some. Work that could be spend benefiting the largest amount of players possible. Like making a very good and fair PvP system. Making a PK server will benefit maybe 20% of Diablo player base at most - and even then I'm being overly generous with the percentage. Besides, those servers have a name. It's called Diablo 2.
Meh if you ask on this site its obviously a pvm oriented community, if you go ask around jsp, which is a much larger community then this one, the majority there are far more pvp oriented and would hate to see pk be restricted. I could throw the same numbers out in reverse and neither of us could prove anything either way:P
Yeah not everyone pk's in the sense of joining a baal run, attacking 7 people, and talking trash when you pwn them, but people definately enjoy the freedom of being able to take anyone out anytime. Ever happen to be in a chaos game where someone steals drops from the runner for example, they're often unpartied and pk'd as a method to remove them. Or maybe someones just being annoying, its so nice just being able to kill them and not having to deal with them.
About griefing, my guess is that either the game creator will act a host and he can kick an idling player from the game
I hope they have a few long quests. I can't wait to have the power to boot people:) If it requires a 2 man vote to boot, so what, I'll just have a friend in game with me and we'll boot the other two.
Theres far fewer ways to get around people saying man, your a jerk, we're going to gank up and kill you so you leave, then there are ever going to be to figure out ways to get around hard coded anti-griefing measures. For every issue you fix your going to create another, and even if you came up with tools/toggles/options that elimated griefing, the anti griefing system in itself would probably just end up being more annoying and restrictive then an occasional griefer.
i'm leaning more towards the conservative side myself. Change is nice, but to much change can F*** up a perfect running engine :P, wich in my eyes is happening to D3. For one, i'm really gonna miss runewords and the variable stat-outcomes each time you make them, those are what kept me playing D2 for so long. Dont get me wrong, i'll still be buying D3, but i doubt the replayability will be as top-notch as D2 was/is, and boredom would kick in much faster with "the new and improved version".
Agreed, except for the I'l still be buying it part. If they nerf down pk I'm not wasting the 50 bucks on it
I've played plenty of games that had balanced races, which all had different max stats. If they can figure out how to balance various races in a way that they all have uses, I'm sure its not nearly as hard to balance 4? stats.
Look at a game like guild wars even. They didn't auto assign your attribute points, you could assign them into anything you wanted, and anyone you asked about how to make a particular class would have their own formula they swore by.
As far as I know GW works prety much like WoW and D3.
In that game what you call stats is simply skill augmentation (like passive skills in Diablo3). In Gw theres is autostats behind the scenes. You don't have the freedom of choice to choose your characters HP, Defence, Weapon damage... Thats why necromancers allways have low base HP and warriors have high base HP.
Except I will no longer be able to do this with any of my good items because I corrupted them by trying them out apparently. Placing more restrictions on trading, is not a free market design.
I'm starting to think that you don't undertod my post...
What i'm trying to say is that a absolute free market is not necesserely good to a game since it's main principle (maximization of utility by freedom of choice) does not apply in a game reality.
Theres a very good reason for BoE and we all read the explanation. It's try to build a healthy free market that don't suffer from a item overflow (BoE is like a item synch).
Whats a synch in a game...basically a way to destroy currency. If they make repairing equipment a huge synch, then you waste a ton of time grinding gold to keep your gear in top top shape. If you have to buy food for your character becuase he gets hungry, what is this...a gold synch. You have to spend time grinding gold to buy food. Syncs are all about increasing time spent grinding, why do you think pay per play mmos have so many? For someone who knows the math of game design, I'd hope you know how synchs work:P
...?
Of course i know how synch works, I explained it on my post O.o
What i'm telling you is that synchs DOES NOT increase gold griding by any means.
Durability does not increase the need to farm gold. Your equipement only breaks when you play the game, and when you play the game you get the gold you need to repair. It's not like someone will play D3 just to grind the gold for repairs. Thats ridicolous.
What synchs do is add more option to the player spend his money. If he will play more and have more money to spend depends only if the game is fun and caught his attention.
There's plenty of risk to pk, I've killed plenty of pk'ers, and been killed on plenty of pk attempts. Theres elements of alertness, risk, and a bit of thrill present when more random pk is present, that are not present in arena only systems.
With that I agree. I love pk based games like Ultima Online were you start to shake just because you put your foot out of the town. It's cool how wars between pks and apks naturally appears in those games and moves the whole server.
But imo pk never was that fun in D2 because it was near impossible to apk organize and counter balance the forces (because pks can simple exit and change room, unlike a mmo were if you exit and log in again you will appear in the same spot you left problably with a dozen of traps under your feet). It's like PKs have all people playig the game as possible targets, but APKs can only target the PK in his room. So a PK can keep allways choosing the victims he know can't kill him without any possibility of been persecuted.
Due the nature of Diablo multiplayer it's impossible to implement a decent pk system.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In time the hissing of her sanity
Faded out her voice and soiled her name
And like marked pages in a diary
Everything seemed clean that is unstained
The incoherent talk of ordinary days
Why would we really need to live?
Decide what is clear and what's within a haze
What you should take and what to give" - Opeth
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
+ I love the new art direction.
- I really don't like the health globes. Potions all the way for me.
+ Changes in the PvP and other gameplay mechanics seem okay to me so far.
- The intrusive red targeting silhouette from Diablo 1 looks awful to me now.
So kind of a mixed bag, but I tend to prefer Diablo 2's system.
I've played plenty of games that had balanced races, which all had different max stats. If they can figure out how to balance various races in a way that they all have uses, I'm sure its not nearly as hard to balance 4? stats.
Look at a game like guild wars even. They didn't auto assign your attribute points, you could assign them into anything you wanted, and anyone you asked about how to make a particular class would have their own formula they swore by.
Except I will no longer be able to do this with any of my good items because I corrupted them by trying them out apparently. Placing more restrictions on trading, is not a free market design.
Whats a synch in a game...basically a way to destroy currency. If they make repairing equipment a huge synch, then you waste a ton of time grinding gold to keep your gear in top top shape. If you have to buy food for your character becuase he gets hungry, what is this...a gold synch. You have to spend time grinding gold to buy food. Syncs are all about increasing time spent grinding, why do you think pay per play mmos have so many? For someone who knows the math of game design, I'd hope you know how synchs work:P
There's plenty of risk to pk, I've killed plenty of pk'ers, and been killed on plenty of pk attempts. Theres elements of alertness, risk, and a bit of thrill present when more random pk is present, that are not present in arena only systems.
I get more of a rush being in a baal game when a pk'er joins then running ubers or any other area.
Put a stormshield on a character with the right amount of dex, and you get 75% block. Put a stormshield on a character with no dex and you get what like 20% block? They also tend to have fairly significant hp differences as well. I see a difference.
1% a month inflation or deflation wouldnt really matter at all, but it doesnt happen this way in games, especially if they're getting rid of ladder. However what happens in all constantly running games with a currency, the longer you play, the more you horde, the higher the amount of gold you must have to be rich and afford top end things. When it first started if you had a few thousand fg you were the man, now people have 80,000fg, so your 2k is pennies. If you havent been consistently playing and hording the entire time your left behind.
Syns or no syncs, its totally irrelevant. Your effecting everyone equally with them, so your slowing the rate of saving, and doing nothing against hording. After the games been around a while getting wealthy in it is like trying to live today getting paid a wage from 1920.
Did you ever stop and think for a minute, that D2 is one of the most long running and popular rpgs to date, and also one of the only rpg's to date that was more barter based then currency based? If you have a successful deviation of the norm why mainstream, why not just improve on one of the differences that contributed to success?
Meh if you ask on this site its obviously a pvm oriented community, if you go ask around jsp, which is a much larger community then this one, the majority there are far more pvp oriented and would hate to see pk be restricted. I could throw the same numbers out in reverse and neither of us could prove anything either way:P
Yeah not everyone pk's in the sense of joining a baal run, attacking 7 people, and talking trash when you pwn them, but people definately enjoy the freedom of being able to take anyone out anytime. Ever happen to be in a chaos game where someone steals drops from the runner for example, they're often unpartied and pk'd as a method to remove them. Or maybe someones just being annoying, its so nice just being able to kill them and not having to deal with them.
I hope they have a few long quests. I can't wait to have the power to boot people:) If it requires a 2 man vote to boot, so what, I'll just have a friend in game with me and we'll boot the other two.
Theres far fewer ways to get around people saying man, your a jerk, we're going to gank up and kill you so you leave, then there are ever going to be to figure out ways to get around hard coded anti-griefing measures. For every issue you fix your going to create another, and even if you came up with tools/toggles/options that elimated griefing, the anti griefing system in itself would probably just end up being more annoying and restrictive then an occasional griefer.
Agreed, except for the I'l still be buying it part. If they nerf down pk I'm not wasting the 50 bucks on it
But im definitely conservative about diablo 3
As far as I know GW works prety much like WoW and D3.
In that game what you call stats is simply skill augmentation (like passive skills in Diablo3). In Gw theres is autostats behind the scenes. You don't have the freedom of choice to choose your characters HP, Defence, Weapon damage... Thats why necromancers allways have low base HP and warriors have high base HP.
I'm starting to think that you don't undertod my post...
What i'm trying to say is that a absolute free market is not necesserely good to a game since it's main principle (maximization of utility by freedom of choice) does not apply in a game reality.
Theres a very good reason for BoE and we all read the explanation. It's try to build a healthy free market that don't suffer from a item overflow (BoE is like a item synch).
...?
Of course i know how synch works, I explained it on my post O.o
What i'm telling you is that synchs DOES NOT increase gold griding by any means.
Durability does not increase the need to farm gold. Your equipement only breaks when you play the game, and when you play the game you get the gold you need to repair. It's not like someone will play D3 just to grind the gold for repairs. Thats ridicolous.
What synchs do is add more option to the player spend his money. If he will play more and have more money to spend depends only if the game is fun and caught his attention.
With that I agree. I love pk based games like Ultima Online were you start to shake just because you put your foot out of the town. It's cool how wars between pks and apks naturally appears in those games and moves the whole server.
But imo pk never was that fun in D2 because it was near impossible to apk organize and counter balance the forces (because pks can simple exit and change room, unlike a mmo were if you exit and log in again you will appear in the same spot you left problably with a dozen of traps under your feet). It's like PKs have all people playig the game as possible targets, but APKs can only target the PK in his room. So a PK can keep allways choosing the victims he know can't kill him without any possibility of been persecuted.
Due the nature of Diablo multiplayer it's impossible to implement a decent pk system.