Say what you will about Blizzard; but they do keep in touch with their customers. You don't always have to like their solutions to the problems, but at least they don't ignore them.
Many players say that Diablo II had more "endgame" content, but most fail to see that much of it happened after Lord of Destruction.
Nevertheless, I ask:
What is the difference between Diablo II's release-day-endgame and Diablo III's?
39 more levels?
Inconsequential point. Experience levels barely restricted you to gear above level what.... 60-70?
The 5 stat points (meh), and 1 skill point (different system now) was all you got. And really, not THAT big a deal. So 1 skill got slightly stronger each level... ooo... ahhh.... not impressed. Numerical value on "levels" is pointless.
Hell, you could clear Hell difficulty of Diablo 2 at like level 60 or so. So, those last levels were just a grind... ESPECIALLY Level 99, who's total XP was equal to the total XP from 1-98. Not what I would call stellar end-game content, by any measure.
Cuz you know they are going to buff the legendaries, then make them drop far less often. Blizzard likes to give with one hand and take with the other.
They will have to drop less often. If you want ilvl 63 legendary weap with 1000+ dps from every legendary, thats crazy talk with current droprates.
Drop rates might be low, yes (and expectedly so), but since Legendaries have mostly fixed stats, they will generally have top-performing numbers, and their random property or two that they get, will just add some variety.
Same company line, "All your issues will be addressed in some future patch at some unspecified time. Meanwhile, we can't talk about any specifics. We love you!"
Fanboys will recite this mantra ad nauseum for a few more months like good little soldiers. Meanwhile, forget about pvp in 2012.
"improved Legendary items .. epic in ways you probably won’t be expecting."
let me guess, legendarys get a % proc chance to increase dmg for xx seconds just like in wow, yea I'm totally not expecting that
You do realize that's all the procs in D2 boiled down to also right?
I don't think we'll actually see one that says "20% damage to increase all damage by 10% for 10 seconds" They'll be more interesting like runewords in D2 that added skills but the outcome is the same, a proc to increase damage.
Glad to hear something, but as a 5-year Hunter from WoW who's been there since the days of Classic and went all the way up to Tier 13 in Cataclysm...I'm not holding my breath. Far too many times have I heard things like this and far too many times have I seen things not delivered...actions speak far louder than words, no matter who they're from. What also has me hesitant is that this is all stuff that we've heard before, just retold with a different wording, and that bothers me. I know they said they were buffing Legendary items, but would it have hurt to put in a few examples or at least...you know...share their thoughts with the big caveat at the top saying:
**WORK IN PROGRESS...SUBJECT TO CHANGE!**
This would also be nice for what they are planning to do in terms of "promoting “build diversity,” with buffs to many rarely used, underpowered class abilities." Again, same caveat as above, but at this point I think some people (myself included) are getting a little tired of just hearing the same words repeated over and over again. I am not personally asking for huge, gigantic lists detailed out to the dotted 'i' and crossed 't', but something like...oh...Demon Hunter as an example (Again..EXAMPLE):
"We find that 'Strafe' for Demon Hunters isn't being used due to high Hatred costs and low damage output. While we originally had in mind to balance the ability of shooting on the move, we low-balled the damage and this is our idea for what we're going to do to give the skill a much-needed boost..."
Again...this was just an EXAMPLE, but to me, this is far better than what we have gotten, which again, is nothing but mostly the same words just in a different way of saying them. This is the kind of communication that Blizzard has been sorely lacking for a long time and this would be a good time to turn around and change that and try and earn back some of the trust that they've lost with their playerbase. I don't think it's too far a stretch to say that for some people on the fence this 1.0.4 patch will be a 'make-or-break' thing, and Blizzard should be putting more effort into keeping those people into wanting to play and to give them something to look forward to and also to not let the 'hype' build up too much.
Well I'm satisfied, atleast they're aware its pretty bad right now and are planning on doing something about it. With everything coming out in the next few months I don't mind waiting up to a year if thats what its gonna take, I'd rather they not rush it and make something crappy. Still wish they could 'patch' the story but it doesn't quite work that way...
Ahahaha, when CEO make statement like this about game it means they really lost lot of players/customers so now it’s time to fall on knees and beg for mercy
Well, hopefully they make the game better. It wasn't at all worth waiting all those years. My main disappointment wasn't the itemization or gameplay balance, but was the terribly ham-fisted story and it's method of delivery. Sad that adults with so much back story to pull from, produced the story for this game. Nothing they can do to fix that sadly. I am hoping an expansion or two steps up and delivers. Diablo went from being my fav fantasy world to being a fond memory...
He basically spent several paragraphs going over how they were not really prepared for the launch numbers (again) and basically said nothing new in the remainder of his post.
Well it isn't exactly a sorry, but I appreciate that Mike took the time to address diablo fans. Might be a little too late for most, or some, however it's not going to improve over night. I think we would of all been better off getting more delays and polish before they released, but it's a lose/lose situation for them. Should of stuck to their old ways instead of pushing so hard to release before summer.
Well, while it's nice to hear all this, the question is what the reality will be. While Morhaime will obviously say a lot of positive things for the future, he isn't a member of the development team, he's just running the company. He could say something like we will be combating bot users but in the end the development team may end up just nerfing some areas that were too profitable for bots while also punishing legitimate players in the process. I'm more interested in the actual means in which they intend to achieve the given goals rather than some uplifting but vague talk about future improvements. Also, am I the only one who now cringes when they find a Legendary item? I just want them to be better already Just found See No Evil and it seems like the crappiest level 10 Monk helm I've seen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head!
Many players say that Diablo II had more "endgame" content, but most fail to see that much of it happened after Lord of Destruction.
Nevertheless, I ask:
What is the difference between Diablo II's release-day-endgame and Diablo III's?
39 more levels?
Inconsequential point. Experience levels barely restricted you to gear above level what.... 60-70?
The 5 stat points (meh), and 1 skill point (different system now) was all you got. And really, not THAT big a deal. So 1 skill got slightly stronger each level... ooo... ahhh.... not impressed. Numerical value on "levels" is pointless.
Hell, you could clear Hell difficulty of Diablo 2 at like level 60 or so. So, those last levels were just a grind... ESPECIALLY Level 99, who's total XP was equal to the total XP from 1-98. Not what I would call stellar end-game content, by any measure.
I agree. And that's the point, before, in Diablo 2, it was just a grind to get the "60" to "99".
That's what "we" are so desperate about? I'll take Diablo 3's endgame any day, at least I can get that NV thing and other stuff. Not to mention the things they've got prepared.
What I'm saying is that the same thing that hooked up players before, 11 years ago, isn't the same as now. People changed, all the guys who played Diablo 2 in that time are 9-11 years older, what they like changed too.
Really, I don't know. It seems many expected some kind of MMO out of it, with constant patches.
Of course Diablo 3 had to be differente. More of the same wouldn't have cut it either. Nowadays it's pretty hard to get people playing a game except in a competitive matter...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality.
Rubberbanding is a MAJOR issue in my opinion and I have not seen anyone talk about it.
It can be REALLY annoying at times, does this issue happends often with everyone?
I don't think this is an indicator the game is a "disappointment". It's saying, look we know there are some flaws, and we're working on them and taking it serious.
Well it isn't exactly a sorry, but I appreciate that Mike took the time to address diablo fans. Might be a little too late for most, or some, however it's not going to improve over night. I think we would of all been better off getting more delays and polish before they released, but it's a lose/lose situation for them. Should of stuck to their old ways instead of pushing so hard to release before summer.
I don't think delays would have done anything because most of the issues stem from the endgame which is hard to test internally. Blizzard had people playing Inferno, but compared to release they were using a sample size far too small to predict how it would actually play out. The only thing they could have done differently was unlock the entire game in the beta so that it could have been properly tested.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Nevertheless, I ask:
What is the difference between Diablo II's release-day-endgame and Diablo III's?
Do the class changes in one patch, Legendary changes in another.
39 more levels?
Burned out Warcraft addict turned Diablo III addict.
formerly 3/8 H DS10, YAY CASUALIZATION!
Cuz you know they are going to buff the legendaries, then make them drop far less often. Blizzard likes to give with one hand and take with the other.
Inconsequential point. Experience levels barely restricted you to gear above level what.... 60-70?
The 5 stat points (meh), and 1 skill point (different system now) was all you got. And really, not THAT big a deal. So 1 skill got slightly stronger each level... ooo... ahhh.... not impressed. Numerical value on "levels" is pointless.
Hell, you could clear Hell difficulty of Diablo 2 at like level 60 or so. So, those last levels were just a grind... ESPECIALLY Level 99, who's total XP was equal to the total XP from 1-98. Not what I would call stellar end-game content, by any measure.
Drop rates might be low, yes (and expectedly so), but since Legendaries have mostly fixed stats, they will generally have top-performing numbers, and their random property or two that they get, will just add some variety.
Same company line, "All your issues will be addressed in some future patch at some unspecified time. Meanwhile, we can't talk about any specifics. We love you!"
Fanboys will recite this mantra ad nauseum for a few more months like good little soldiers. Meanwhile, forget about pvp in 2012.
You do realize that's all the procs in D2 boiled down to also right?
I don't think we'll actually see one that says "20% damage to increase all damage by 10% for 10 seconds" They'll be more interesting like runewords in D2 that added skills but the outcome is the same, a proc to increase damage.
Oh I dunno, we might see it in December if we're lucky.
**WORK IN PROGRESS...SUBJECT TO CHANGE!**
This would also be nice for what they are planning to do in terms of "promoting “build diversity,” with buffs to many rarely used, underpowered class abilities." Again, same caveat as above, but at this point I think some people (myself included) are getting a little tired of just hearing the same words repeated over and over again. I am not personally asking for huge, gigantic lists detailed out to the dotted 'i' and crossed 't', but something like...oh...Demon Hunter as an example (Again..EXAMPLE):
"We find that 'Strafe' for Demon Hunters isn't being used due to high Hatred costs and low damage output. While we originally had in mind to balance the ability of shooting on the move, we low-balled the damage and this is our idea for what we're going to do to give the skill a much-needed boost..."
Again...this was just an EXAMPLE, but to me, this is far better than what we have gotten, which again, is nothing but mostly the same words just in a different way of saying them. This is the kind of communication that Blizzard has been sorely lacking for a long time and this would be a good time to turn around and change that and try and earn back some of the trust that they've lost with their playerbase. I don't think it's too far a stretch to say that for some people on the fence this 1.0.4 patch will be a 'make-or-break' thing, and Blizzard should be putting more effort into keeping those people into wanting to play and to give them something to look forward to and also to not let the 'hype' build up too much.
Nothing to see here really.
That's what "we" are so desperate about? I'll take Diablo 3's endgame any day, at least I can get that NV thing and other stuff. Not to mention the things they've got prepared.
What I'm saying is that the same thing that hooked up players before, 11 years ago, isn't the same as now. People changed, all the guys who played Diablo 2 in that time are 9-11 years older, what they like changed too.
Really, I don't know. It seems many expected some kind of MMO out of it, with constant patches.
Of course Diablo 3 had to be differente. More of the same wouldn't have cut it either. Nowadays it's pretty hard to get people playing a game except in a competitive matter...
It can be REALLY annoying at times, does this issue happends often with everyone?
I don't think delays would have done anything because most of the issues stem from the endgame which is hard to test internally. Blizzard had people playing Inferno, but compared to release they were using a sample size far too small to predict how it would actually play out. The only thing they could have done differently was unlock the entire game in the beta so that it could have been properly tested.