I respect your opinions, but I simply do not agree with you on a lot of the ideas. Good thing this is a free country and I am allowed to disagree. I don't like forcing my ideas on people, but your arguments also cannot persuade me. So it's all cool.
You are perfectly welcome to disagree. I'm simply trying to impress on you how, the the fantasy sounds great, the mechanics simply don't translate.
Effectively the only way to make a skill point system fair is for all bonuses to be additive with the exact same scaling. For optimization the alternatives are...
Bonuses Same, Multiplicative: One point in everything that multiplies what you want to do, continue to spread points evenly to maximize multiplicative output.
Bonuses Different, Additive/Multiplicative - Cap each skill that affects what you want to do in order of highest total multiplier.
Yes; it's a great system for feeling like a special snowflake. No; the system has consistently shown itself non-viable for balance and offering actual choices to players.
There's games and games and games and even in the BEST skill-point systems there's no escaping the fact that the skill point systems provide far more false choice than they do real choice. Players like you who are looking more for "feeling" obviously gravitate toward the design as properly executed the balance is good enough that the baseline is usable. However for players looking for optimization the system only presents a simple math problem to pick the absolute best output for expenditure. This is also a core problem with itemization (though blizzard is trying its best to fix it, and for the most part has produced several roughly balanced output potentials within classes).
What you REALLY want is a reason to take those lesser used passives. And there are much better ways (objectively) to approach the problem than adding an at best net-neutral mechanic. Maybe add a ring with the effect "Gain (damage stat) based on health globe bonus" with a generous conversion. Suddenly that "bad" 50% health globe bonus that you want a reason to use becomes a viable replacement for another damage passive. And it does so without adding a thousand false choices to the game or adding an "optimization spreadsheet" situation. You add a single point of balance rather than changing 30 passives into 150 passives. You can now tune how desirable the globe passive is by supporting it with another item (Razor Strop fire nova build???) or tuning a skill to synergize with it (HotA - Birthright). Rather than adding a passive minigame you create an environment that asks the player to work toward items that synergize with each other or find ways to improve their weak spots that synergize with their build.
Now some part of the stuff I wholeheartedly agree. For example, adding an legendary that gives special affix that benefits the Health Globe Bonus.
And actually I was one of those people who actually defended D3 when it came out, telling D2 that stats point and skill point were illusion of player's freedom to choose their own builds because there were only a few viable builds in D2. But then not all players, including me, just want to build characters that has the most optimal and viable builds. I don't mind building characters that are good to own Tier 6 and only able to do up to Grift 35, as long as it's fun and interesting for me. I just feel like choosing how much bonus I can get from my passive would make it more fun, even though it might be an illusion of free choice. In fact, I think most players will probably have 1 or 2 characters that are optimally built, and the rest are just for fun and experimentation, and it would be more fun for me and some players if we could choose more than 4 passives (or 5 with Hellfire Amulet). After all, games are to provide entertaining value. A game that is not fun to you, may be fun for others. Truth is, they will never to balance the game with itemization anyway, so skill point system in passive skills is definitely an option to make the game "FEEL" more entertaining without further wrecking the balance.
Like I said, I integrated this concept with other concepts which I have posted somewhere else. So it's not just simply skill points in passive skills I have in mind.
I like the game now, and I like the way it's going. And I really don't mind if they never implement skill point system, since you have made it sound like an obstacle to make a game fun (however games like Borderland and Borderland 2 are actually pretty fun to me).
Now some part of the stuff I wholeheartedly agree. For example, adding an legendary that gives special affix that benefits the Health Globe Bonus.
And actually I was one of those people who actually defended D3 when it came out, telling D2 that stats point and skill point were illusion of player's freedom to choose their own builds because there were only a few viable builds in D2. But then not all players, including me, just want to build characters that has the most optimal and viable builds. I don't mind building characters that are good to own Tier 6 and only able to do up to Grift 35, as long as it's fun and interesting for me. I just feel like choosing how much bonus I can get from my passive would make it more fun, even though it might be an illusion of free choice. In fact, I think most players will probably have 1 or 2 characters that are optimally built, and the rest are just for fun and experimentation, and it would be more fun for me and some players if we could choose more than 4 passives (or 5 with Hellfire Amulet). After all, games are to provide entertaining value. A game that is not fun to you, may be fun for others. Truth is, they will never to balance the game with itemization anyway, so skill point system in passive skills is definitely an option to make the game "FEEL" more entertaining without further wrecking the balance.
Like I said, I integrated this concept with other concepts which I have posted somewhere else. So it's not just simply skill points in passive skills I have in mind.
I like the game now, and I like the way it's going. And I really don't mind if they never implement skill point system, since you have made it sound like an obstacle to make a game fun (however games like Borderland and Borderland 2 are actually pretty fun to me).
I don't disbelieve that you've defended D3 in the past. My point is that there's nothing to be gained from a skill point system from a design perspective. Any customization of passives would be better placed in itemization because (from a designer perspective) balancing one system is far easier than balancing two. And the balance for itemization has consistently gotten better as D3 has matured. Those "feels" you're looking for can be achieved with lower-impact systems which alter non-combat potentials and by increasing the viable palette of runes available to players (currently lower level runes are on average less viable than higher level ones rather than equivalent). Combined with better balance and more itemization you'd have the freedon to "personalize" your build that you're looking for while also feeding the crunch that optimizers want.
On the subject of BL and BL2 (which I've player extensively :P) the actual skill trees involved are small enough and the trees niche enough that the balance remains tight. And because many of the bonuses don;t have "crunch" it results in a system that feels really good. That hasn't stopped optimizers from finding "best" builds, but the general balance of any given build is closer simply because of the niche nature of skills. the abundance of skill points helps to ensure you can get nearly every skill relevant to your build and the ones where you absolutely HAVE to make a choice generally have little enough crunch that it becomes preference. The entire design of the game basically ensures that the majority of how you perform is dictated by your items rather than your skill loadout as any given skill means much less in BL1/2 than it does in D3.
One of the better skill systems but it's more a flair which serves to allow a player to tailor their niche to a specific style rather than determining the raw power they have (since each "niche" skill group results in similar potential power). Give a Siren an Anarchy in BL and it doesn't matter what her skills are, she's gonna shred anything and everything. It really is apples to oranges from design perspective.
And that Pound of Flesh example.. I still think some Barbs would go 5/5, some would go 0/5, and nobody would actually go 3/5. They'd look at it, look at the other passive they were considering putting some points in.. and go 5/5 on one and none on the other.
Yuck, you seem to have been brainwashed by the modern insanity of cookie cutter.......
Unlike the videos you watch, well over 50% of the D3 population is already trying random new and intricate things for the sake of trying them. We are sick of doing "the best" thing, and want to do "the fun" thing.
Introducing some manner of buffing passives is certainly an entertaining idea!
Sorry, I think even the people trying random new things for fun are going to say "it would be fun to take Pound of Flesh" or "it would be fun to take (some other Passive)".. NOT "it would be fun to take half of each".
And I never disagreed that some manner of buffing passives would be interesting.
Yes, I understand they are two very different games from design perspective, but after all, it's been called the FPS of Diablo, so that's why I compared them. And very nice of you explain the pros and cons in details. But see, I was hoping that D3 passive could achieve this kind of state, as you have described for BL
"and the ones where you absolutely HAVE to make a choice generally have little enough crunch that it becomes preference."
Of course this will probably take major work, and the energy can be used to expand on itemization aspect of the game.
"because (from a designer perspective) balancing one system is far easier than balancing two."
That's why never in my post I show strong urge to push the ideas because in reality, it will take too much work and they might as well develop another new game. But then, I am just reluctant to see skill point system totally neglected.
And that Pound of Flesh example.. I still think some Barbs would go 5/5, some would go 0/5, and nobody would actually go 3/5. They'd look at it, look at the other passive they were considering putting some points in.. and go 5/5 on one and none on the other.
Yuck, you seem to have been brainwashed by the modern insanity of cookie cutter.......
Unlike the videos you watch, well over 50% of the D3 population is already trying random new and intricate things for the sake of trying them. We are sick of doing "the best" thing, and want to do "the fun" thing.
Introducing some manner of buffing passives is certainly an entertaining idea!
Sorry, I think even the people trying random new things for fun are going to say "it would be fun to take Pound of Flesh" or "it would be fun to take (some other Passive)".. NOT "it would be fun to take half of each".
And I never disagreed that some manner of buffing passives would be interesting.
Well there are some skills I will just need partial bonus of, such as Unforgiving and Boon of Bul-Kathos because I won't need as much fury regeneration or as much cooldown reduction for my other skills because my items have enough CDR. And also skill like Superstition. I don't mind having a little buff for my resistance, but I don't need the whole 20%. Or if I want, I could try to boost it up to 24% just because one of my item has skill point bonus to that skill.
And that Pound of Flesh example.. I still think some Barbs would go 5/5, some would go 0/5, and nobody would actually go 3/5. They'd look at it, look at the other passive they were considering putting some points in.. and go 5/5 on one and none on the other.
Yuck, you seem to have been brainwashed by the modern insanity of cookie cutter.......
Unlike the videos you watch, well over 50% of the D3 population is already trying random new and intricate things for the sake of trying them. We are sick of doing "the best" thing, and want to do "the fun" thing.
Introducing some manner of buffing passives is certainly an entertaining idea!
Sorry, I think even the people trying random new things for fun are going to say "it would be fun to take Pound of Flesh" or "it would be fun to take (some other Passive)".. NOT "it would be fun to take half of each".
And I never disagreed that some manner of buffing passives would be interesting.
What you continue to keep ignoring is the numerous times people have mentioned past games and the fact that your assumption is false based on history. Sorry, but history does not lie.
It is sort of like how Main stat, CC, CD, Ele work atm. Some of them begin to diminish as they increase, when this happens, you spread the stats around a little for maximum efficiency. Skill points on passives will obviously work the same way, as it has the last 20 years in games that include it, and as it will for every game hereafter that includes them.
Yes, I understand they are two very different games from design perspective, but after all, it's been called the FPS of Diablo, so that's why I compared them. And very nice of you explain the pros and cons in details. But see, I was hoping that D3 passive could achieve this kind of state, as you have described for BL
"and the ones where you absolutely HAVE to make a choice generally have little enough crunch that it becomes preference."
Of course this will probably take major work, and the energy can be used to expand on itemization aspect of the game.
"because (from a designer perspective) balancing one system is far easier than balancing two."
That's why never in my post I show strong urge to push the ideas because in reality, it will take too much work and they might as well develop another new game. But then, I am just reluctant to see skill point system totally neglected.The thing is we got a skill point s
The thing is we *have* a skill point system. You have 6 points to spend on actives and 4 points to spend on passives. increasing the number of points you have to spend won't improve the system any, you need to make spending those points matter in new ways. Just adding more points will only result in making your choices less meaningful to what you want to do, and will only add more disparity between "good" builds and "bad" builds.
The reason BL's skill system works (FYI D2's did not) is because you get a LOT of points relative to the number of skills you choose form and each skill is extremely niche. You don't have to choose between two ways to increase your fire rate, you have to choose between what weapon or damage mechanic you use (or between multiple uncrunchable effects). That just doesn't translate into D3 because the core design is so drastically different.
Would it be wonderful if skill point systems worked? Yes it would. The problem is that time and again they've proven themselves to both not work and be nearly impossible to balance, and other methods of personal customization far outstrip skill systems in balance and effectiveness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You are perfectly welcome to disagree. I'm simply trying to impress on you how, the the fantasy sounds great, the mechanics simply don't translate.
Effectively the only way to make a skill point system fair is for all bonuses to be additive with the exact same scaling. For optimization the alternatives are...
Bonuses Same, Multiplicative: One point in everything that multiplies what you want to do, continue to spread points evenly to maximize multiplicative output.
Bonuses Different, Additive/Multiplicative - Cap each skill that affects what you want to do in order of highest total multiplier.
Yes; it's a great system for feeling like a special snowflake. No; the system has consistently shown itself non-viable for balance and offering actual choices to players.
There's games and games and games and even in the BEST skill-point systems there's no escaping the fact that the skill point systems provide far more false choice than they do real choice. Players like you who are looking more for "feeling" obviously gravitate toward the design as properly executed the balance is good enough that the baseline is usable. However for players looking for optimization the system only presents a simple math problem to pick the absolute best output for expenditure. This is also a core problem with itemization (though blizzard is trying its best to fix it, and for the most part has produced several roughly balanced output potentials within classes).
What you REALLY want is a reason to take those lesser used passives. And there are much better ways (objectively) to approach the problem than adding an at best net-neutral mechanic. Maybe add a ring with the effect "Gain (damage stat) based on health globe bonus" with a generous conversion. Suddenly that "bad" 50% health globe bonus that you want a reason to use becomes a viable replacement for another damage passive. And it does so without adding a thousand false choices to the game or adding an "optimization spreadsheet" situation. You add a single point of balance rather than changing 30 passives into 150 passives. You can now tune how desirable the globe passive is by supporting it with another item (Razor Strop fire nova build???) or tuning a skill to synergize with it (HotA - Birthright). Rather than adding a passive minigame you create an environment that asks the player to work toward items that synergize with each other or find ways to improve their weak spots that synergize with their build.
Now some part of the stuff I wholeheartedly agree. For example, adding an legendary that gives special affix that benefits the Health Globe Bonus.
And actually I was one of those people who actually defended D3 when it came out, telling D2 that stats point and skill point were illusion of player's freedom to choose their own builds because there were only a few viable builds in D2. But then not all players, including me, just want to build characters that has the most optimal and viable builds. I don't mind building characters that are good to own Tier 6 and only able to do up to Grift 35, as long as it's fun and interesting for me. I just feel like choosing how much bonus I can get from my passive would make it more fun, even though it might be an illusion of free choice. In fact, I think most players will probably have 1 or 2 characters that are optimally built, and the rest are just for fun and experimentation, and it would be more fun for me and some players if we could choose more than 4 passives (or 5 with Hellfire Amulet). After all, games are to provide entertaining value. A game that is not fun to you, may be fun for others. Truth is, they will never to balance the game with itemization anyway, so skill point system in passive skills is definitely an option to make the game "FEEL" more entertaining without further wrecking the balance.
Like I said, I integrated this concept with other concepts which I have posted somewhere else. So it's not just simply skill points in passive skills I have in mind.
I like the game now, and I like the way it's going. And I really don't mind if they never implement skill point system, since you have made it sound like an obstacle to make a game fun (however games like Borderland and Borderland 2 are actually pretty fun to me).
I don't disbelieve that you've defended D3 in the past. My point is that there's nothing to be gained from a skill point system from a design perspective. Any customization of passives would be better placed in itemization because (from a designer perspective) balancing one system is far easier than balancing two. And the balance for itemization has consistently gotten better as D3 has matured. Those "feels" you're looking for can be achieved with lower-impact systems which alter non-combat potentials and by increasing the viable palette of runes available to players (currently lower level runes are on average less viable than higher level ones rather than equivalent). Combined with better balance and more itemization you'd have the freedon to "personalize" your build that you're looking for while also feeding the crunch that optimizers want.
On the subject of BL and BL2 (which I've player extensively :P) the actual skill trees involved are small enough and the trees niche enough that the balance remains tight. And because many of the bonuses don;t have "crunch" it results in a system that feels really good. That hasn't stopped optimizers from finding "best" builds, but the general balance of any given build is closer simply because of the niche nature of skills. the abundance of skill points helps to ensure you can get nearly every skill relevant to your build and the ones where you absolutely HAVE to make a choice generally have little enough crunch that it becomes preference. The entire design of the game basically ensures that the majority of how you perform is dictated by your items rather than your skill loadout as any given skill means much less in BL1/2 than it does in D3.
One of the better skill systems but it's more a flair which serves to allow a player to tailor their niche to a specific style rather than determining the raw power they have (since each "niche" skill group results in similar potential power). Give a Siren an Anarchy in BL and it doesn't matter what her skills are, she's gonna shred anything and everything. It really is apples to oranges from design perspective.
Sorry, I think even the people trying random new things for fun are going to say "it would be fun to take Pound of Flesh" or "it would be fun to take (some other Passive)".. NOT "it would be fun to take half of each".
And I never disagreed that some manner of buffing passives would be interesting.
Yes, I understand they are two very different games from design perspective, but after all, it's been called the FPS of Diablo, so that's why I compared them. And very nice of you explain the pros and cons in details. But see, I was hoping that D3 passive could achieve this kind of state, as you have described for BL
"and the ones where you absolutely HAVE to make a choice generally have little enough crunch that it becomes preference."
Of course this will probably take major work, and the energy can be used to expand on itemization aspect of the game.
"because (from a designer perspective) balancing one system is far easier than balancing two."
That's why never in my post I show strong urge to push the ideas because in reality, it will take too much work and they might as well develop another new game. But then, I am just reluctant to see skill point system totally neglected.
Well there are some skills I will just need partial bonus of, such as Unforgiving and Boon of Bul-Kathos because I won't need as much fury regeneration or as much cooldown reduction for my other skills because my items have enough CDR. And also skill like Superstition. I don't mind having a little buff for my resistance, but I don't need the whole 20%. Or if I want, I could try to boost it up to 24% just because one of my item has skill point bonus to that skill.
What you continue to keep ignoring is the numerous times people have mentioned past games and the fact that your assumption is false based on history. Sorry, but history does not lie.
It is sort of like how Main stat, CC, CD, Ele work atm. Some of them begin to diminish as they increase, when this happens, you spread the stats around a little for maximum efficiency. Skill points on passives will obviously work the same way, as it has the last 20 years in games that include it, and as it will for every game hereafter that includes them.
The thing is we *have* a skill point system. You have 6 points to spend on actives and 4 points to spend on passives. increasing the number of points you have to spend won't improve the system any, you need to make spending those points matter in new ways. Just adding more points will only result in making your choices less meaningful to what you want to do, and will only add more disparity between "good" builds and "bad" builds.
The reason BL's skill system works (FYI D2's did not) is because you get a LOT of points relative to the number of skills you choose form and each skill is extremely niche. You don't have to choose between two ways to increase your fire rate, you have to choose between what weapon or damage mechanic you use (or between multiple uncrunchable effects). That just doesn't translate into D3 because the core design is so drastically different.
Would it be wonderful if skill point systems worked? Yes it would. The problem is that time and again they've proven themselves to both not work and be nearly impossible to balance, and other methods of personal customization far outstrip skill systems in balance and effectiveness.