I know the front page of our beautiful website has tried to shed some light on this, but I would really love to see blizzard expand on the details page.
I know I can't be the only nephalem that wants to see how much cold damage I have stacked up, along with any other elemental damage OR skill bonus increase. I want to know exactly how much my 22% cold damage will output. It starts to get a bit confusing when you have cold damage and frozen orb damage on your gear, then you use a spell to also increase cold damage ect ect. I thought they didn't want a math problem when calculating dps. I really hope they can expand on the details page to make it easier to analyze everything and when assessing your gear.
People have shit on this game for 2 years about it's user-friendly character building and a total lack of depth.
D3 has it's own "thing" now in this dynamic between sheet DPS and non-sheet DPS. Being able to access your non-sheet DPS and apply it correctly remains the lone shining example of individual player skill (during the char building process).
Do people understand the power of Cooldown Reduction? Most don't seem to. It's because they don't have a tool-tip or details page explaining to them exactly how much more DPS per second you can apply with 40%+ CDR.
I wouldn't be opposed to a listing of ele damage totals, but that's about it. I'm stating it unequivocally; The line in the sand that will separate great players from average players will be how much said player understands non-sheet DPS. Players should have to work and think during the character building process.
So I'm kinda a little bit with you on the ele damage thing, but I really am fine with them leaving non-sheet DPS as an issue for experienced players to use to their advantage, and it provides inexperienced players something to learn about.
In my post I was not thinking about cool down reduction or resource cost. There would still be depth there. Think about toughness. Sure they list all the different attributes, but it still doesn't hold your hand saying, "hey you have to much vitality, start thinking about AR"
I don't want them to hold my hand either, far from it. But i think many players would still like to know, "hey how much elemental damage to I have in each category? Which spells should I stack up?" I think it will add a nice visual representation of how your gear is working with one another.
In my post I was not thinking about cool down reduction or resource cost. There would still be depth there. Think about toughness. Sure they list all the different attributes, but it still doesn't hold your hand saying, "hey you have to much vitality, start thinking about AR"
I don't want them to hold my hand either, far from it. But i think many players would still like to know, "hey how much elemental damage to I have in each category? Which spells should I stack up?" I think it will add a nice visual representation of how your gear is working with one another.
I'll agree that they should clear a few matters up. As in "chance to cast ___". What chance? What %? What do we mean by "chance"?
I guess what I'm saying is, I want non-sheet DPS to remain the calling card of RoS character building.
People have shit on this game for 2 years about it's user-friendly character building and a total lack of depth.
D3 has it's own "thing" now in this dynamic between sheet DPS and non-sheet DPS. Being able to access your non-sheet DPS and apply it correctly remains the lone shining example of individual player skill (during the char building process).
Do people understand the power of Cooldown Reduction? Most don't seem to. It's because they don't have a tool-tip or details page explaining to them exactly how much more DPS per second you can apply with 40%+ CDR.
I wouldn't be opposed to a listing of ele damage totals, but that's about it. I'm stating it unequivocally; The line in the sand that will separate great players from average players will be how much said player understands non-sheet DPS. Players should have to work and think during the character building process.
So I'm kinda a little bit with you on the ele damage thing, but I really am fine with them leaving non-sheet DPS as an issue for experienced players to use to their advantage, and it provides inexperienced players something to learn about.
The problem with cdr is the small amounts it comes in on various gear. You need a decent sized amount (like of any stat) for it to be useful, and dropping other stats for some cd just isn't worth it for some classes (not sure what class you were talking about benefits so well from cdr, but it sure ain't DH).
People have shit on this game for 2 years about it's user-friendly character building and a total lack of depth.
D3 has it's own "thing" now in this dynamic between sheet DPS and non-sheet DPS. Being able to access your non-sheet DPS and apply it correctly remains the lone shining example of individual player skill (during the char building process).
Do people understand the power of Cooldown Reduction? Most don't seem to. It's because they don't have a tool-tip or details page explaining to them exactly how much more DPS per second you can apply with 40%+ CDR.
I wouldn't be opposed to a listing of ele damage totals, but that's about it. I'm stating it unequivocally; The line in the sand that will separate great players from average players will be how much said player understands non-sheet DPS. Players should have to work and think during the character building process.
So I'm kinda a little bit with you on the ele damage thing, but I really am fine with them leaving non-sheet DPS as an issue for experienced players to use to their advantage, and it provides inexperienced players something to learn about.
The problem with cdr is the small amounts it comes in on various gear. You need a decent sized amount (like of any stat) for it to be useful, and dropping other stats for some cd just isn't worth it for some classes (not sure what class you were talking about benefits so well from cdr, but it sure ain't DH).
Monk; Has Beacon of Ytar Passive, granting 20% CDR. I use it with Seven Seven Sided Strike/Sustained Attack and Inner Sanctuary/Forbidden Palace. Both very potent damage dealers that I can now cast quite freely, only suffering a short 6-9 second cooldown. I use a 12% CDR Diamond in my helm and sport a Hack with 10% CDR, giving me approx 40% CDR total.
There are many Legendaries that grant boosted CDR. I have yet to acquire all the ones I want.
Keep in mind that CDR suffers diminished returns at such high stacks, you won't get the actual % you have stacked.
I've said it before, I think CDR will soon be recognized as one of the premiere non-sheet DPS dealers in the game. blizzard knows this. They designed it that way. That's why CDR is listed as an offensive paragon primary, as opposed to a utility.
Yeahhhh it makes sense for monks, but again that's because you literally get half your amount from a passive. No one else has that luxury, so it's a much less wanted stat. DH still gets more damage out of using a 2h crossbow than anything, which adjusts our stat attractiveness accordingly. It also really depends on the spec you run, CDR can be a good stat, but it's just a gamble over guaranteed braindead easy crit.
I guess what I'm saying is, I want non-sheet DPS to remain the calling card of RoS character building.
I don't.
I'm already getting sick at whipping out the calculator every time I find an item to figure out if it's an upgrade or not. This distracts from actually playing the game and, therefore, I think it's very bad for the health of the game.
I'm already getting sick at whipping out the calculator every time I find an item to figure out if it's an upgrade or not. This distracts from actually playing the game and, therefore, I think it's very bad for the health of the game.
Indeed. If I want to do math, I will go back to doing my job (as a mathematician), instead of playing a game.
I'm already getting sick at whipping out the calculator every time I find an item to figure out if it's an upgrade or not. This distracts from actually playing the game and, therefore, I think it's very bad for the health of the game.
Indeed. If I want to do math, I will go back to doing my job (as a mathematician), instead of playing a game.
I say this respectfully (and in a most ruksak manner) ... .. . ... If my aunt had a penis she'd be my uncle.
A truly deep ARPG will involve a world of numbers, hidden as well as apparent. Often what makes the difference between a good player and a great player is who can see past the numbers on their sheet and realize the true potential of hidden DPS avenues.
Diablo involves math. Or at least it should, as it does now. We're talking about removing "figuring" from the equation and replacing it with user-friendly summaries for all avenues of DPS buffering. To say that this would be a daunting task logistically (from a development stance) would be a gross understatement.
I say....not only is this asking too much of the developers, but, it is also catering to the lazy and stupid. Not saying anyone in this thread fits such a label. I'm saying there's no reason why a Diablo-rookie 10 year old child should be able to build a character as well as a 20 year veteran of the series. With too much user-freindly interface and hand-holding guidance, we would certainly see such a dynamic play out where the intelligence was sapped from the game and replaced with nearly automatic character building.
ARPG's must retain their integrity and reputation as pencil 'n' paper games of thought.
ARPG's must retain their integrity and reputation as pencil 'n' paper games of thought.
Well, you probably should take that concern to Dave Brevik and the Schaefer boys. Their goal with Diablo 1 (I'm done linking the article, because I've done it a half dozen times now) was to REMOVE the pencil-and-paper aspect from the RPGs and just get back to killing monsters.
Hidden statistics, spending time with spreadsheets, etc. was exactly what they wanted to remove. So, to put it back in is the most un-Diablo thing Blizzard could do. It's a horrible betrayal to what Diablo was supposed to be.
So, in reality, YOUR definition of the ARPG is actually what differs from the people who created the series. So maybe your aunt has a penis? I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that Max Schaefer was pretty proud that his mother could sit down and play Diablo 1 with no problems because he wanted to expand the audience by taking the tedium and math out of the RPG and adding some "action" into it to create an ARPG.
Spreadsheets, calculators, paper and pencil... none of that is ACTION. And, no matter what you argue, ACTION is the basis of the genre. You don't have an ARPG if you have to whip out the calculator every time an item drops to figure out if you should equip it or not. What you have, then, is a pencil-and-paper RPG.
ARPG's must retain their integrity and reputation as pencil 'n' paper games of thought.
Well, you probably should take that concern to Dave Brevik and the Schaefer boys. Their goal with Diablo 1 (I'm done linking the article, because I've done it a half dozen times now) was to REMOVE the pencil-and-paper aspect from the RPGs and just get back to killing monsters.
Hidden statistics, spending time with spreadsheets, etc. was exactly what they wanted to remove. So, to put it back in is the most un-Diablo thing Blizzard could do. It's a horrible betrayal to what Diablo was supposed to be.
So, in reality, YOUR definition of the ARPG is actually what differs from the people who created the series. So maybe your aunt has a penis? I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that Max Schaefer was pretty proud that his mother could sit down and play Diablo 1 with no problems because he wanted to expand the audience by taking the tedium and math out of the RPG and adding some "action" into it to create an ARPG.
Spreadsheets, calculators, paper and pencil... none of that is ACTION. And, no matter what you argue, ACTION is the basis of the genre. You don't have an ARPG if you have to whip out the calculator every time an item drops to figure out if you should equip it or not. What you have, then, is a pencil-and-paper RPG.
...and you can quote that ancient history a million fucking times. It doesn't change fact.
This genre is steeped in a history of requiring player interpretation and thought.
Too much of what many of you are proposing will dissolve the genre into automatic character building, the choices presented merely an illusion of depth. D3 has drastically improved their character building, by a gazillion miles. I feel part of this must be due to the subdermal presence of non-sheet DPS.
...and you can quote that ancient history a million fucking times. It doesn't change fact.
What fact? The fact that your definition of what an ARPG is goes completely contrary to what the guys who, essentially, defined the genre were trying to do? I'd say that's not "ancient history" but a very relevant critique of your... opinion. At the very least, the Diablo series was about accessibility, simplification, and gameplay that's combat-centric.
Whether you like it or not, that means there is a MINIMAL focus on sitting around in town ALT-tabbed dicking around with spreadsheets, while pontificating on the forums like anyone who disagrees with you is some kind of lesser player because they don't understand the true essence of pouring over builds and .001% gear differences for hours with 10 different websites and a dozen spreadsheets open.
God forbid we just want to play the game and not relive high school calculus class. I spend all day at work doing math. I don't find it remotely enjoyable to come home and have to do MORE math to relax. That's un-fucking-real.
EDIT
Ultimately I disagree with you because your argument amounts to "Who cares what the people who started the series were trying to accomplish with it? That's contrary to what I believe the series is, so it doesn't matter." And, in reality, that's not even a counterpoint. It's just a really shitty way to dismiss facts that you cannot otherwise refute. Whether you like it or not, it's a FACT that one of the major design decisions behind D1 and D2 was NOT to force people into pencil-and-paper dickery. So you simply cannot argue that it's the heart and soul of the ARPG. It's not.
...and you can quote that ancient history a million fucking times. It doesn't change fact.
What fact? The fact that your definition of what an ARPG is goes completely contrary to what the guys who, essentially, defined the genre were trying to do? I'd say that's not "ancient history" but a very relevant critique of your... opinion.
If it is just my opinion, then how did Diablo 2 reckon itself as such a thinking mans game? It was one of the most number-intensive, study chart games I've ever played.
Spawned from the very minds you're mentioning. No coincidence that the first Diablo they didn't dev turned out to be the most user-friendly of the series.
I do believe what ruksak is hinting at is that historically the evolution of roleplaying games extends far beyond the design goals of one game.
historically these games just evolved forward and grew thicker and more complex over time not less complex.
As far as Diablo 1 being able to to be played by a grandma, yes its actually a stunning accomplishment as far as im concerned. click the mouse and away you go.
click the monster and it gets attacked. diablo 1 has this trait and its beautiful and diablo 2 and 3 have it as well. my wife plays D3, she sucks BIG TIME, but she picked it up the controls in about 30 seconds, should she get a huge warning strobe light when she uses topaz gems on her monk? its a wrong choice after all and harms her character by preventing it from achieving maximum potential by wasting sockets.
she also forgot to fill her 4th action bar button. She only uses 3 skills and the 2 mouse buttons. should she be prevented from leaving town?
I would argue the potential for mistake only makes the game better. im still not convinced she understands what runes are. its adorable...
Diablo 2 and 3 having mountains more math and rules and number systems does not:
tear them completely away from the original goals of simplicity,
go completely against the wishes of the original designers,
make them definitively worse games, or lesser examples, etc. etc.
but to some people yes. it does do those things. thats how they interpret the changes...
on the flip side many people feel that roleplaying games as they lean back towards more simplicy, hand holding and auto calculations, they interpret those changes as horrific changes.....changes that if left unchecked would basically rub away the fabric of roleplaying game design and we'ed be back in the stone age playingWizards and warriors.....
If it is just my opinion, then how did Diablo 2 reckon itself as such a thinking mans game? It was one of the most number-intensive, study chart games I've ever played.
Can we just drop this whole line of thought? It really reeks of "I LOVE TO DO MATH AND THAT MAKES ME SUPERIOR TO THOSE WHO DON'T" and not of actual discussion.
You can go find the interview yourself. I've linked it on these forums at least a half dozen times. Brevik and the Schaefers were very clear that their design intentions, what they were trying to create, was a game with increased accessibility by focusing more on smashing monsters and getting loot and less focus on math and spending hours trying to figure out what items you should equip. Hence the "action" in ARPG. They were very clear that they felt the RPG market had become too niched because it was too focused on the paper-and-pencil aspects and not focused enough on what they thought was fun: killing monsters and being rewarded for doing so.
That's their words, not mine. The interview was conducted AFTER D2 was born, so any issues you have with consistency you'll have to take up with them, not me. Good luck with that, though.
My guess is that, as with many things, many aspects of D2 were... unintended... because they were working in unexplored space. Just like b.net duping, it's very possible the developers never really thought that there would be breakpoints for faster attack/block/hit recovery. It's VERY possible that "complex" and math-y things found their way into the game by accident and that they never were rectified because the game didn't need it at the time and not because they were purposely trying to develop the most complex, thinking man's game, ever known to man.
The difference is that it was very possible to conquer D2 on the hardest difficulty without ever busting out pencils and paper. I sincerely doubt that anyone is going to touch T6 without fundamentally understanding how to evaluate a -10% drop in sheet DPS versus 17% more damage to cold skills. That's the difference. Even though there was plenty of math you COULD do in D2, you really never HAD to. D3: RoS is quite the opposite. You can easily feel the "crunch" just trying to make the jump into Torment 1.
My opinion is that there is plenty of "hidden knowledge" in how to take various legendary/set bonuses and fit them together with proper skills into a cohesive build that we don't really need to lump more in. As it stands +15% to fire damage is already difficult to calculate because not everyone is running a pure-fire build and we have absolutely no way of knowing our damage breakdowns. 15% to fire damage has different values if I have 37% of my damage as fire versus 87% of my damage as fire. To be unable to see, somehow, through the UI how that 15% fire damage bonus effects my character is completely unacceptable. All it does is create unnecessary hidden variables that force people to waste time alt-tabbed and not playing the game.
Ultimately, I'm sorry, but staring at a website or spreadsheet just isn't playing Diablo and that sort of activity should be minimized as much as possible. All games should focus on people actually PLAYING them.
Whatever you think the roots of Diablo may be, the series has clearly moved beyond it. To the majority of the players now, spending hours staring at a spreadsheet is not a fun way to play, and it will be foolish for Blizzard to make their game as such. As I have said, I play the game to kill monsters, not to do math. Worse still, it's math that is easy (compared to my job), but tedious.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I know I can't be the only nephalem that wants to see how much cold damage I have stacked up, along with any other elemental damage OR skill bonus increase. I want to know exactly how much my 22% cold damage will output. It starts to get a bit confusing when you have cold damage and frozen orb damage on your gear, then you use a spell to also increase cold damage ect ect. I thought they didn't want a math problem when calculating dps. I really hope they can expand on the details page to make it easier to analyze everything and when assessing your gear.
People have shit on this game for 2 years about it's user-friendly character building and a total lack of depth.
D3 has it's own "thing" now in this dynamic between sheet DPS and non-sheet DPS. Being able to access your non-sheet DPS and apply it correctly remains the lone shining example of individual player skill (during the char building process).
Do people understand the power of Cooldown Reduction? Most don't seem to. It's because they don't have a tool-tip or details page explaining to them exactly how much more DPS per second you can apply with 40%+ CDR.
I wouldn't be opposed to a listing of ele damage totals, but that's about it. I'm stating it unequivocally; The line in the sand that will separate great players from average players will be how much said player understands non-sheet DPS. Players should have to work and think during the character building process.
So I'm kinda a little bit with you on the ele damage thing, but I really am fine with them leaving non-sheet DPS as an issue for experienced players to use to their advantage, and it provides inexperienced players something to learn about.
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
I guess what I'm saying is, I want non-sheet DPS to remain the calling card of RoS character building.
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
Monk; Has Beacon of Ytar Passive, granting 20% CDR. I use it with Seven Seven Sided Strike/Sustained Attack and Inner Sanctuary/Forbidden Palace. Both very potent damage dealers that I can now cast quite freely, only suffering a short 6-9 second cooldown. I use a 12% CDR Diamond in my helm and sport a Hack with 10% CDR, giving me approx 40% CDR total.
There are many Legendaries that grant boosted CDR. I have yet to acquire all the ones I want.
Keep in mind that CDR suffers diminished returns at such high stacks, you won't get the actual % you have stacked.
I've said it before, I think CDR will soon be recognized as one of the premiere non-sheet DPS dealers in the game. blizzard knows this. They designed it that way. That's why CDR is listed as an offensive paragon primary, as opposed to a utility.
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
I'm already getting sick at whipping out the calculator every time I find an item to figure out if it's an upgrade or not. This distracts from actually playing the game and, therefore, I think it's very bad for the health of the game.
I hope they expand on it even more and make it even more "hazy"......
Indeed. If I want to do math, I will go back to doing my job (as a mathematician), instead of playing a game.
A truly deep ARPG will involve a world of numbers, hidden as well as apparent. Often what makes the difference between a good player and a great player is who can see past the numbers on their sheet and realize the true potential of hidden DPS avenues.
Diablo involves math. Or at least it should, as it does now. We're talking about removing "figuring" from the equation and replacing it with user-friendly summaries for all avenues of DPS buffering. To say that this would be a daunting task logistically (from a development stance) would be a gross understatement.
I say....not only is this asking too much of the developers, but, it is also catering to the lazy and stupid. Not saying anyone in this thread fits such a label. I'm saying there's no reason why a Diablo-rookie 10 year old child should be able to build a character as well as a 20 year veteran of the series. With too much user-freindly interface and hand-holding guidance, we would certainly see such a dynamic play out where the intelligence was sapped from the game and replaced with nearly automatic character building.
ARPG's must retain their integrity and reputation as pencil 'n' paper games of thought.
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
Hidden statistics, spending time with spreadsheets, etc. was exactly what they wanted to remove. So, to put it back in is the most un-Diablo thing Blizzard could do. It's a horrible betrayal to what Diablo was supposed to be.
So, in reality, YOUR definition of the ARPG is actually what differs from the people who created the series. So maybe your aunt has a penis? I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that Max Schaefer was pretty proud that his mother could sit down and play Diablo 1 with no problems because he wanted to expand the audience by taking the tedium and math out of the RPG and adding some "action" into it to create an ARPG.
Spreadsheets, calculators, paper and pencil... none of that is ACTION. And, no matter what you argue, ACTION is the basis of the genre. You don't have an ARPG if you have to whip out the calculator every time an item drops to figure out if you should equip it or not. What you have, then, is a pencil-and-paper RPG.
This genre is steeped in a history of requiring player interpretation and thought.
Too much of what many of you are proposing will dissolve the genre into automatic character building, the choices presented merely an illusion of depth. D3 has drastically improved their character building, by a gazillion miles. I feel part of this must be due to the subdermal presence of non-sheet DPS.
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
I figured all my build tweaks by playing the game and testing. When does cooldown 'X' end and how does it time with 'Y' and 'Z' etc etc
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
Whether you like it or not, that means there is a MINIMAL focus on sitting around in town ALT-tabbed dicking around with spreadsheets, while pontificating on the forums like anyone who disagrees with you is some kind of lesser player because they don't understand the true essence of pouring over builds and .001% gear differences for hours with 10 different websites and a dozen spreadsheets open.
God forbid we just want to play the game and not relive high school calculus class. I spend all day at work doing math. I don't find it remotely enjoyable to come home and have to do MORE math to relax. That's un-fucking-real.
EDIT
Ultimately I disagree with you because your argument amounts to "Who cares what the people who started the series were trying to accomplish with it? That's contrary to what I believe the series is, so it doesn't matter." And, in reality, that's not even a counterpoint. It's just a really shitty way to dismiss facts that you cannot otherwise refute. Whether you like it or not, it's a FACT that one of the major design decisions behind D1 and D2 was NOT to force people into pencil-and-paper dickery. So you simply cannot argue that it's the heart and soul of the ARPG. It's not.
Spawned from the very minds you're mentioning. No coincidence that the first Diablo they didn't dev turned out to be the most user-friendly of the series.
BurningRope#1322 (US~HC) Request an invite to the official (NA) <dfans> Clan
historically these games just evolved forward and grew thicker and more complex over time not less complex.
As far as Diablo 1 being able to to be played by a grandma, yes its actually a stunning accomplishment as far as im concerned. click the mouse and away you go.
click the monster and it gets attacked. diablo 1 has this trait and its beautiful and diablo 2 and 3 have it as well. my wife plays D3, she sucks BIG TIME, but she picked it up the controls in about 30 seconds, should she get a huge warning strobe light when she uses topaz gems on her monk? its a wrong choice after all and harms her character by preventing it from achieving maximum potential by wasting sockets.
she also forgot to fill her 4th action bar button. She only uses 3 skills and the 2 mouse buttons. should she be prevented from leaving town?
I would argue the potential for mistake only makes the game better. im still not convinced she understands what runes are. its adorable...
Diablo 2 and 3 having mountains more math and rules and number systems does not:
tear them completely away from the original goals of simplicity,
go completely against the wishes of the original designers,
make them definitively worse games, or lesser examples, etc. etc.
but to some people yes. it does do those things. thats how they interpret the changes...
on the flip side many people feel that roleplaying games as they lean back towards more simplicy, hand holding and auto calculations, they interpret those changes as horrific changes.....changes that if left unchecked would basically rub away the fabric of roleplaying game design and we'ed be back in the stone age playingWizards and warriors.....
You can go find the interview yourself. I've linked it on these forums at least a half dozen times. Brevik and the Schaefers were very clear that their design intentions, what they were trying to create, was a game with increased accessibility by focusing more on smashing monsters and getting loot and less focus on math and spending hours trying to figure out what items you should equip. Hence the "action" in ARPG. They were very clear that they felt the RPG market had become too niched because it was too focused on the paper-and-pencil aspects and not focused enough on what they thought was fun: killing monsters and being rewarded for doing so.
That's their words, not mine. The interview was conducted AFTER D2 was born, so any issues you have with consistency you'll have to take up with them, not me. Good luck with that, though.
My guess is that, as with many things, many aspects of D2 were... unintended... because they were working in unexplored space. Just like b.net duping, it's very possible the developers never really thought that there would be breakpoints for faster attack/block/hit recovery. It's VERY possible that "complex" and math-y things found their way into the game by accident and that they never were rectified because the game didn't need it at the time and not because they were purposely trying to develop the most complex, thinking man's game, ever known to man.
The difference is that it was very possible to conquer D2 on the hardest difficulty without ever busting out pencils and paper. I sincerely doubt that anyone is going to touch T6 without fundamentally understanding how to evaluate a -10% drop in sheet DPS versus 17% more damage to cold skills. That's the difference. Even though there was plenty of math you COULD do in D2, you really never HAD to. D3: RoS is quite the opposite. You can easily feel the "crunch" just trying to make the jump into Torment 1.
My opinion is that there is plenty of "hidden knowledge" in how to take various legendary/set bonuses and fit them together with proper skills into a cohesive build that we don't really need to lump more in. As it stands +15% to fire damage is already difficult to calculate because not everyone is running a pure-fire build and we have absolutely no way of knowing our damage breakdowns. 15% to fire damage has different values if I have 37% of my damage as fire versus 87% of my damage as fire. To be unable to see, somehow, through the UI how that 15% fire damage bonus effects my character is completely unacceptable. All it does is create unnecessary hidden variables that force people to waste time alt-tabbed and not playing the game.
Ultimately, I'm sorry, but staring at a website or spreadsheet just isn't playing Diablo and that sort of activity should be minimized as much as possible. All games should focus on people actually PLAYING them.
Whatever you think the roots of Diablo may be, the series has clearly moved beyond it. To the majority of the players now, spending hours staring at a spreadsheet is not a fun way to play, and it will be foolish for Blizzard to make their game as such. As I have said, I play the game to kill monsters, not to do math. Worse still, it's math that is easy (compared to my job), but tedious.