The change I was referring to was the change of removing some of the existing calculations from the game, proposed in Shaggys thought exercise.
I feel that the amount of people who would admire or be in support of such a change would be very low in number compared to the amount of people who would prefer either keeping the calculations we have now or even those who categorically wish for even more calculations. and that last group I feel could be split again (people who long for more updated and accurate calculations and a group who wants NEW calculations providing new information)
I feel that each of those 3 groups wouldSTILL outnumber the first group of people who might be classified as "hardcore ruthless number geeks"
Somehow I was under the impression that you are arguing the opposite. I am saying that most moderate players will prefer to have more accurate informations on things like how much CDR they have in total, and/or how much extra damage are they getting off a skill, as opposed to the system we have now where the information is not available.
In WoW I was absolutely furious about shaman's Windfury having a hidden cooldown. to my recollection it was kind of shoehorned into the game at somepoint in TBC, when I began playing long after 2 hand Enhancement fighters ran roughshod over the battle grounds with that particular skill.......My stance on that topic was why the fuck would they not reveal that info alongside the probably hundreds of other skills in game where it was listed? lol there was no trace of elitism in that situation....
You appreciation of streamlining the data displayed and delivered is proven true with...oh God....many titles, the evolution of the AD&D pen and paper rule-sets.......humanbehaviour....tetris....just countless examples everywhere.........
Right, and that's what I'm ultimately getting at. Gaming is a different landscape now than what it was in the early 2000s. Because of things like Steam and the battle.net app and F2P games you see that MOST gamers are actually playing multiple games at once (even if it's just WoW, D3, and HS). That means that even if they have 25 hours per week to play games when they're not at work and taking care of life, that doesn't mean it's 25 hours per week to devote to a single game.
THAT is the battle that WoW has been fighting for years now. Millions of people play WoW but very few of those millions of people ONLY play WoW. So apply that to D3: millions of people play D3 but very few of those millions of people ONLY play D3. Typically (not always) hardcore theorycrafting meshes best with people who are spending a significant chunk of their time playing a single game which just isn't the majority of gamers. And therein lies my concern with steps that lead players to alt-tab to compare gear.
As I said the damage/toughness/healing statistics are ALREADY muddy. An advanced player will know if IAS is better for his build than Crit Chance, regardless of which pushes his sheet damage higher. An advanced player will know whether to add HPs, armor, or res all to increase his toughness. An advanced player will gravitate towards some forms of healing and away from others. And that has nothing to do with evaluating a 2000 DPS Gidbinn versus a 2200 Solanium (I probably misspelled it, legendary 1h mace, crits give chance to spawn a health globe) which takes a whole different understanding of your character.
I feel there already is plenty of opportunity for "elite" players to differentiate themselves from "regular" Joes and I think it *is* a tragic mistake to make these school/skill boosts, CDR, etc. be translucent instead of transparent.
I think you're right there is a good mix of mud in the math of D3. Certainly not a crazy shortage...thank fucking christ....
reading how you've highlighted that theorycrafting generally meshes better with games that can command more of a players' time? that makes sense.....
how messing around with the visible numbers could very well be harmful to the overall reception of the game? yep im inclined to agree with that as well.
if we examine these specific applications its easier to come to an agreement.
my posts seem to stretch out to the edges of what has been created or experienced so far...citing very niche games, niches scenarios to describe a large looming way of admiring complex games from a damp basement. It's hard to really deny about 95% the specifics of your last post.
How crazy you bring up Steam; what I love about steam is when I scan through its catalogue It appears the floodgates have been blasted open for RPGS of all shapes and sizes.....enough strategy games to make me vomit.......8 bit roguelikes popping up like tulips........
Steam is a number crunchers' wet nightmare......
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I feel that the amount of people who would admire or be in support of such a change would be very low in number compared to the amount of people who would prefer either keeping the calculations we have now or even those who categorically wish for even more calculations. and that last group I feel could be split again (people who long for more updated and accurate calculations and a group who wants NEW calculations providing new information)
I feel that each of those 3 groups wouldSTILL outnumber the first group of people who might be classified as "hardcore ruthless number geeks"
Was that what you were referring to?
Somehow I was under the impression that you are arguing the opposite. I am saying that most moderate players will prefer to have more accurate informations on things like how much CDR they have in total, and/or how much extra damage are they getting off a skill, as opposed to the system we have now where the information is not available.
interestingly enough;
In WoW I was absolutely furious about shaman's Windfury having a hidden cooldown. to my recollection it was kind of shoehorned into the game at somepoint in TBC, when I began playing long after 2 hand Enhancement fighters ran roughshod over the battle grounds with that particular skill.......My stance on that topic was why the fuck would they not reveal that info alongside the probably hundreds of other skills in game where it was listed? lol there was no trace of elitism in that situation....
THAT is the battle that WoW has been fighting for years now. Millions of people play WoW but very few of those millions of people ONLY play WoW. So apply that to D3: millions of people play D3 but very few of those millions of people ONLY play D3. Typically (not always) hardcore theorycrafting meshes best with people who are spending a significant chunk of their time playing a single game which just isn't the majority of gamers. And therein lies my concern with steps that lead players to alt-tab to compare gear.
As I said the damage/toughness/healing statistics are ALREADY muddy. An advanced player will know if IAS is better for his build than Crit Chance, regardless of which pushes his sheet damage higher. An advanced player will know whether to add HPs, armor, or res all to increase his toughness. An advanced player will gravitate towards some forms of healing and away from others. And that has nothing to do with evaluating a 2000 DPS Gidbinn versus a 2200 Solanium (I probably misspelled it, legendary 1h mace, crits give chance to spawn a health globe) which takes a whole different understanding of your character.
I feel there already is plenty of opportunity for "elite" players to differentiate themselves from "regular" Joes and I think it *is* a tragic mistake to make these school/skill boosts, CDR, etc. be translucent instead of transparent.
I think you're right there is a good mix of mud in the math of D3. Certainly not a crazy shortage...thank fucking christ....
reading how you've highlighted that theorycrafting generally meshes better with games that can command more of a players' time? that makes sense.....
how messing around with the visible numbers could very well be harmful to the overall reception of the game? yep im inclined to agree with that as well.
if we examine these specific applications its easier to come to an agreement.
my posts seem to stretch out to the edges of what has been created or experienced so far...citing very niche games, niches scenarios to describe a large looming way of admiring complex games from a damp basement. It's hard to really deny about 95% the specifics of your last post.
How crazy you bring up Steam; what I love about steam is when I scan through its catalogue It appears the floodgates have been blasted open for RPGS of all shapes and sizes.....enough strategy games to make me vomit.......8 bit roguelikes popping up like tulips........
Steam is a number crunchers' wet nightmare......