PvP isn't in the game.
PvP is in the game.
WoW has what i'm talking about.
I'm not talking about WoW.
lafu, i'm simply trying to identify where you're basing your arguments. You're saying that i'm taking your words out of context, but what is the context? What background am I looking at when we're talking about an ARPG with a ladder, half a dozen diffirent pvp modes, etc. Clearly it's not a game currently in production. Clearly it is how you would like D3 to be, but walk me through the thought process you're having.
I think we've established what pvp content is in, for sure. What we need to establish is, of what's "missing," or could be in, where it comes from and why (other than "just because") it should be in to complete part of what's already there and if we know where the ideas come from we can more easily discuss how it would complete D3.
I've already addressed that point. I was specifically referring to the LMS format that we had already seen when stating "we've seen it." You simply took that out of context.
It was not out of context based on what you had quoted.
The closest model we've seen is WoW, where PvE and PvP abilities were not separated. That game turned out pretty fantastic, although I'm sure people will find a way to bash it. I'm simply suggesting that more support for competition in the game will pay off exponentially in terms of replay value, fun, and therefore customer satisfaction. I've stated my points many, many times. It's very easy to be negative and poke holes in ideas. It requires no imagination, simply a cynical attitude. If you're happy with how the game is, i.e. no competition that matter and a simple PvE grind for gear, just sit back, relax and wait for release. I'm not suggesting anything that will affect your enjoyment of the game, because everything I've suggested should be optional.
Ok, so we've established most of this is based on WoW. Thanks. That makes the arguemnts a little more fluid in that we have a point of reference.
But you're talking about pvp that isn't being implemented. That pvp is already in the game. It's been developed and it's not being removed. What's being argued here is that pvp should be further developed (to what end I suppose is up for continued debate). I'm asking you what you see as that end. In what games you see a similar end. And ultimately how you see continuity between that game and where D3 pvp could/should end up.
Here is exactly what I, personally, would like to see. This isn't set in stone by any means, and I'm 100% sure the developers could come up with far superior ideas than me. Tell me this doesn't sound incredible for the game:
1. A public ladder system for both TDM and LMS.
2. Unique competition modes, i.e.:
- Hoard Mode - teams of characters compete to hold off hoards of monsters. Whoever is over-run first loses.
- Content Racing - teams of characters compete PvM content (PvErs should love this!)
- Capture the flag.
- Protect the NPC, or VIP.
- Unique prestige awards for winners of all of these different formats. I.e. Titles, paraphernalia, aesthetic rewards, ears, etc. (I'm sure infinitely awesome things could be thought up that don't award gear but keep people competing)
- Winner takes all - Items or gold is put up for grabs to the winner. Would be amazing if the public had the ability to bid on the winner as well. This should be an OPTION for every format. If you don't want to participate, great, but for those that do it should be there.
3. 1 on 1 dueling system with competitive ladder support.
Probably more that I can't think of in 5 minutes.
But you made it sound as though the ideal level of pvp development (presumably what you're talking about in this latest post) exists already in another game. What games are we drawing on (obviously mmo's, fps, etc) to make this list? And as I continued on to ask, what kind of relationship do those games have with D3?
I mean, it's all well and good to pick out an aspect of one game that you like, but we should pay some attention to how we adapt these things cross-title. Can some of these things mesh with the "Jay," view of D3. Are some of these things possible, but simply out of the ideology of the game? Are some of them just hard to fit into an ARPG by it's vary nature?
ex.
-Ladder is one of those things that could obvious come and go easily.
-Unique modes are probably more interdependant on the code and might not be so easily put in.
We know that it can be done. We've seen it. It doesn't have to be perfectly balanced.
What games would you use as an example there?
Are any of them analogous to D3?
I'm referring to LMS PvP, which we've seen in video footage.
But you're talking about pvp that isn't being implemented. That pvp is already in the game. It's been developed and it's not being removed. What's being argued here is that pvp should be further developed (to what end I suppose is up for continued debate). I'm asking you what you see as that end. In what games you see a similar end. And ultimately how you see continuity between that game and where D3 pvp could/should end up.
It's not exactly a negative thing towards PvEer's, as ultimately it will make it a better game AND it will bring more players to the scene on release. I have a good 5 or so friends who don't want to buy the game now that the arena system has no looks to be in any way competitive. Of course, there's no way in telling how many people are actually waiting for something big like this, but I think I can fairly say there will be a lot. And more players would just be better all around, for blizzard's income, for the in game queues for player searching, etc..
To try and get away from the "what makes the game better," arguments (since that's 100% opinion and we can do it ad nauseum) i'd like to simply state, expectations don't drive development at this state. Some years ago they had a concept in mind for D3, years later that became a working model where they added design components and postulated about further iteration, and today we have what's essentially the working product with bugs and design kinks to iron out.
To say that Blizzard didn't consider it's own revenue (potential) from Diablo3 and simply ignored the issues you're coming up with here is quite silly. They considered it as i'm sure they considered implementing pandas as a race in WoW, or considered making orcs-in-space instead of starcraft. Ultimately they've settled on a design scheme that they like and they clearly feel comfortable saying "this is how it is and this is why we made it like that."
If some potential buyers are turned off for want of serious pvp development I really have no words for them and frankly don't understand how they could have arrived at such expectations. However; all is not lost. As I have mentioned, there are a large number of other titles out there with plenty (if not all) designer development time invested in competitive pvp. Please invest there and show your support for the genre, if you feel that you're not being represented by Blizzard. The market isn't deaf. If you all speak with your wallet and buy a bunch of arena pvp rpg's, i'm sure diablo3's expansion will have all the pvp you could want and then some.
Proletaria, we aren't asking for any of this "because it's like WoW." Nobody is looking to take the game in the direction of that piece of garbage (Incoming flame Storm.) I personally love the diablo series and I will be spending the hours upon hours completing the game and finding gear. What I don't like is that the arena feature is such a joke at this point. Unless someone else comes out with their own tournaments and ladders (I'm not even looking for tournaments really,) the arena is going to have most the teams queuing up with almost no strategy and no incentive to play their best. Think of WoW (I referenced WoW I must be a fanboy) and how their non rated games consist of constant leavers and teams who just charge in with no strategy. I wouldn't mind if they made a split non-ranked and ranked mode, so that if you don't want to fight against the more serious, you don't have to.
I use WoW as an at-hand example, nothing more. Unless one has been under a rock since LoD, they've been exposed to a LOT of other gaming since that time. It's reasonable to presume people have new expectations for D3 and I try to be sympathetic when I explain that it isn't the hallmark of an ARPG like Diablo. I played WoW, I also played a dozen other titles (and then some) since Diablo 2. I currently play EVE online, Leage of Legends, Starcraft 2, etc. but i'm careful to not mix up what I expect out of each title in terms of content. Demanding something another game has because it worked so well there (or not) doesn't tend to work and even if it is implemented, tends to come off poorly.
Unless you can provide me with some blizzard posting about the development of this arena content or more broadly, just the development of pvp as a metagame, I am forced to assume it is just another expectation as I reasoned above. And seriously, the "you don't have to pvp," argument is just the worst line ever and really needs to die here. Developers don't have magic wands that they iterate on content with and generating pvp content would take man hours away from something else (cue the accusations that it's the RMAH). You simply cannot argue there is absolutely no negative for pvm traditionalists in the development of competitive pvp.
I agree that the shared space of the diablo3-wow player venn diagram has a lot of overlap, but also has sections that do not.
I wasn't arguing in favor of pvp. Its not going to be my focus, but i do plan to give it a shot every so often.
I do however think that there are enough pvpers that either, later in the game's life, or for an expansion, there will be some pvp content added/refined.
I choose not to speculate on how much they'll enter into that with an expansion or patch. Ironically, this will probably hinge on just how succesful the RMAH system remains a few years down the line.
Personally, my guess is that most pvp'ers are going to play Diablo 3 for a while and go back to whatever MMO, FPS, or RTS they came from or is new. In terms of competitive pvp, D3 isn't going to be anything worth spending time on (by explicit design) so why would they try to stick around in hopes of it coming to fruition when the very things they're campeigning for already exist in other titles?
Is the hope that D3 will have "perfect balance," or something? Should every blizzard rpg from here on out have a serious pvp element to it? I think both of these is unrealistic, but at this point I think i've made the case abundantly clear. These aren't the droids pvp'ers are looking for.
Minor nitpick: the WoW audience is sufficiently large that i wouldn't be surprised if over 75% of the people who pick up d3 have more than a year of WoW under their belt.
Just because WoW and D3 are different games does not mean that they are targetting different audiences. In other words, the same people can like both. I'll even bet there are people somewhere who like neither (shocking! DUN DUN DUNNNNN).
No, I totally agree that the WoW audience houses a great number of Diablo players (or potentially new diablo players). With the number of WoW players out there, having over half of them NOT buy D3 would be a little suprising. However; one should not make the mistake of assuming that presents a connection between the two genres of game. They, quite literally, are targeting a diffirent audience. Make no mistake about that. Now, those audiences DO overlap and probably alot (ie. I'm in the MMO, ARPG and RTS gaming audiences respectively, i'm also in the casual and more hardcore audience depending on the title), but they do have some player members who do NOT overlap: I see these players being primarily the dedicated pvp'ers and the hardcore raiders.
And what about that makes a person liking both or neither shocking? As I said, targets can overlap or they can not touch at all. The only reason to argue for pvp at all (imo) is because blizzard stated at some point they wanted to introduce more meaningful, competitive, or compelling pvp content. Unfortunately, i've not seen any suggestion of that and what i've read from blizzard more recently has suggested the total opposite. They are actively distancing themselves from the competitive pvp metagame. So, what's really left to be said other than "damnit blizzard, I really wanted this in the next generation of diablo," to make your voice heard?
Clearly, they have heard the pvp audience cry out. Equally clearly, they've responded "these are not the droids you are looking for."
The confusion aspect: Skills should not change. Duration of effects should change, that is all. lets say u have a move that stuns for 5 seconds in pve. 5 seconds in PvP is a long time, to long, so they can(because jay has said so in his latest interviews at the conference) change the duration and scale it down in a pvp scenario, and relatively easily. The more players you make in a team the easier it gets. 3v3 is generally pretty good for balancing without much work so 3v3 arena is pretty ideal. I suspect that is why it was chosen in the first place.
These issues are at the core of why Blizzard isn't iterating on pvp for D3, at least not right now. They realize it's an entire game apart to balance and they've expeienced that before.
PvP is optional. Its not a must, you don't have to pvp. Some people take it very hardcore(i do) and some just jump in and wanna beat the shit outta there buddy every once and a while for a giggle. So make a rated arena system, and make a non rated arena system.
Participation is optional, development isn't. Blizzard would still have to spend many man-hours iterating on pvp balance if they made rated pvp a realtiy because creating that content essentially says to the world "this is a serious pvp game too," and opens the flood-gates for wow-forum-esq whining about balance 24 hours a day. Leaving it out washes their hands of it. They can (rightly) point out the game isn't about the pvp aspect and that a level of imbalance is par for the course. They might express an interest in making things more balanced at some point, but they won't be delaying other content to make it happen.
Hell they had simple rated and non rated options in wow when you go 2 the arena master 2 que up, its really not hard. They have a mountain of options to chose from in the actually pvp contest structure(last man standing, death match, capture the flag). there is such potential for all of them it sounds like so much fun, especially considering this is a game with NO HEALERS! Every1 is there to beat the shit out of each other and skill cap will be so high on every class because of it. Its exciting!
I don't know how many times someone has to say it, but this game was not intended for the WoW audience, and the pvp-players of WoW in particular are not the people intended to buy and enjoy D3 in the long-run. They've made it abundantly clear their target market is the relaxed PvM (pushing for more co-op) player who may on occasional dabble in shooting at other players. Just that mention of healers alone makes me shudder to think of what the wow-arena population would do to the Diablo community.
Just wish blizzard would make the game for the people. They don't want to split players up, what a load of shit. we want to be split up! DO IT.
I'm glad they aren't going to just "DO IT," really. They're showing integrity (mock the RMAH all you want) and adherence to the genre that Diablo is a part of while continuing to innovate and iterate on the (largely dungeon-crawling cooperative) gameplay itself.
I hope you don't take my post as insulting or insinuating that the game isn't for you, but it's my read of Blizzard's posting thus far that they're really not trying to develop pvp for the above reasons. As an oldschool gamer this really doesn't affect me one way or the other, but I do feel it's unjust to simply rant on about blizzard's position in this matter as though it were unreasonable. To my thinking, they are actually being very reasonable about it.
Actually you're wrong, it should be able to live peacefully on the horizon along with PvE, and it has in the past in diablo 2.
Whats the problem then? there weren't any official rankings and ladders for it in Diablo 2 neither.
This is what gets me (and perhaps I made my own thread on this issue too quickly ). There is no precedent at all for that level of organized or incentivized pvp in the Diablo series. Putting in those things just sounds like square peg into round hole of the n'th degree. Not only is it unequivocally a balancing nightmare to openly support that level of pvp (just take a gander at, if not WoW, any mmorpg or rpg game out there that promotes itself as having a serious pvp aspect), but it's not at all part of the genre.
PvP in oldschool diablo was a little amusing past-time that some people ply'd at more than others. Duel games were for having a little fun, talking smack, maybe wagering some gold (or stealing piles of it), but never to establish one's self as being a pre-eminent pvp player. People with that mindset hated the diablo series (at least the ones I knew) and had a lot more fun with other titles.
I would definitely not say "keep pvp out of the game," but diablo's very minimally developed pvp was part of the experience. You didn't come for the pvp, but if you did enjoy it, you had another little thing to toy with between mf runs, leveling, or other pvm activities.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
PvP isn't in the game.
PvP is in the game.
WoW has what i'm talking about.
I'm not talking about WoW.
lafu, i'm simply trying to identify where you're basing your arguments. You're saying that i'm taking your words out of context, but what is the context? What background am I looking at when we're talking about an ARPG with a ladder, half a dozen diffirent pvp modes, etc. Clearly it's not a game currently in production. Clearly it is how you would like D3 to be, but walk me through the thought process you're having.
I think we've established what pvp content is in, for sure. What we need to establish is, of what's "missing," or could be in, where it comes from and why (other than "just because") it should be in to complete part of what's already there and if we know where the ideas come from we can more easily discuss how it would complete D3.
It was not out of context based on what you had quoted.
Ok, so we've established most of this is based on WoW. Thanks. That makes the arguemnts a little more fluid in that we have a point of reference.
But you made it sound as though the ideal level of pvp development (presumably what you're talking about in this latest post) exists already in another game. What games are we drawing on (obviously mmo's, fps, etc) to make this list? And as I continued on to ask, what kind of relationship do those games have with D3?
I mean, it's all well and good to pick out an aspect of one game that you like, but we should pay some attention to how we adapt these things cross-title. Can some of these things mesh with the "Jay," view of D3. Are some of these things possible, but simply out of the ideology of the game? Are some of them just hard to fit into an ARPG by it's vary nature?
ex.
-Ladder is one of those things that could obvious come and go easily.
-Unique modes are probably more interdependant on the code and might not be so easily put in.
But you're talking about pvp that isn't being implemented. That pvp is already in the game. It's been developed and it's not being removed. What's being argued here is that pvp should be further developed (to what end I suppose is up for continued debate). I'm asking you what you see as that end. In what games you see a similar end. And ultimately how you see continuity between that game and where D3 pvp could/should end up.
What games would you use as an example there?
Are any of them analogous to D3?
To try and get away from the "what makes the game better," arguments (since that's 100% opinion and we can do it ad nauseum) i'd like to simply state, expectations don't drive development at this state. Some years ago they had a concept in mind for D3, years later that became a working model where they added design components and postulated about further iteration, and today we have what's essentially the working product with bugs and design kinks to iron out.
To say that Blizzard didn't consider it's own revenue (potential) from Diablo3 and simply ignored the issues you're coming up with here is quite silly. They considered it as i'm sure they considered implementing pandas as a race in WoW, or considered making orcs-in-space instead of starcraft. Ultimately they've settled on a design scheme that they like and they clearly feel comfortable saying "this is how it is and this is why we made it like that."
If some potential buyers are turned off for want of serious pvp development I really have no words for them and frankly don't understand how they could have arrived at such expectations. However; all is not lost. As I have mentioned, there are a large number of other titles out there with plenty (if not all) designer development time invested in competitive pvp. Please invest there and show your support for the genre, if you feel that you're not being represented by Blizzard. The market isn't deaf. If you all speak with your wallet and buy a bunch of arena pvp rpg's, i'm sure diablo3's expansion will have all the pvp you could want and then some.
I use WoW as an at-hand example, nothing more. Unless one has been under a rock since LoD, they've been exposed to a LOT of other gaming since that time. It's reasonable to presume people have new expectations for D3 and I try to be sympathetic when I explain that it isn't the hallmark of an ARPG like Diablo. I played WoW, I also played a dozen other titles (and then some) since Diablo 2. I currently play EVE online, Leage of Legends, Starcraft 2, etc. but i'm careful to not mix up what I expect out of each title in terms of content. Demanding something another game has because it worked so well there (or not) doesn't tend to work and even if it is implemented, tends to come off poorly.
Unless you can provide me with some blizzard posting about the development of this arena content or more broadly, just the development of pvp as a metagame, I am forced to assume it is just another expectation as I reasoned above. And seriously, the "you don't have to pvp," argument is just the worst line ever and really needs to die here. Developers don't have magic wands that they iterate on content with and generating pvp content would take man hours away from something else (cue the accusations that it's the RMAH). You simply cannot argue there is absolutely no negative for pvm traditionalists in the development of competitive pvp.
I choose not to speculate on how much they'll enter into that with an expansion or patch. Ironically, this will probably hinge on just how succesful the RMAH system remains a few years down the line.
Personally, my guess is that most pvp'ers are going to play Diablo 3 for a while and go back to whatever MMO, FPS, or RTS they came from or is new. In terms of competitive pvp, D3 isn't going to be anything worth spending time on (by explicit design) so why would they try to stick around in hopes of it coming to fruition when the very things they're campeigning for already exist in other titles?
Is the hope that D3 will have "perfect balance," or something? Should every blizzard rpg from here on out have a serious pvp element to it? I think both of these is unrealistic, but at this point I think i've made the case abundantly clear. These aren't the droids pvp'ers are looking for.
No, I totally agree that the WoW audience houses a great number of Diablo players (or potentially new diablo players). With the number of WoW players out there, having over half of them NOT buy D3 would be a little suprising. However; one should not make the mistake of assuming that presents a connection between the two genres of game. They, quite literally, are targeting a diffirent audience. Make no mistake about that. Now, those audiences DO overlap and probably alot (ie. I'm in the MMO, ARPG and RTS gaming audiences respectively, i'm also in the casual and more hardcore audience depending on the title), but they do have some player members who do NOT overlap: I see these players being primarily the dedicated pvp'ers and the hardcore raiders.
And what about that makes a person liking both or neither shocking? As I said, targets can overlap or they can not touch at all. The only reason to argue for pvp at all (imo) is because blizzard stated at some point they wanted to introduce more meaningful, competitive, or compelling pvp content. Unfortunately, i've not seen any suggestion of that and what i've read from blizzard more recently has suggested the total opposite. They are actively distancing themselves from the competitive pvp metagame. So, what's really left to be said other than "damnit blizzard, I really wanted this in the next generation of diablo," to make your voice heard?
Clearly, they have heard the pvp audience cry out. Equally clearly, they've responded "these are not the droids you are looking for."
These issues are at the core of why Blizzard isn't iterating on pvp for D3, at least not right now. They realize it's an entire game apart to balance and they've expeienced that before.
Participation is optional, development isn't. Blizzard would still have to spend many man-hours iterating on pvp balance if they made rated pvp a realtiy because creating that content essentially says to the world "this is a serious pvp game too," and opens the flood-gates for wow-forum-esq whining about balance 24 hours a day. Leaving it out washes their hands of it. They can (rightly) point out the game isn't about the pvp aspect and that a level of imbalance is par for the course. They might express an interest in making things more balanced at some point, but they won't be delaying other content to make it happen.
I don't know how many times someone has to say it, but this game was not intended for the WoW audience, and the pvp-players of WoW in particular are not the people intended to buy and enjoy D3 in the long-run. They've made it abundantly clear their target market is the relaxed PvM (pushing for more co-op) player who may on occasional dabble in shooting at other players. Just that mention of healers alone makes me shudder to think of what the wow-arena population would do to the Diablo community.
I'm glad they aren't going to just "DO IT," really. They're showing integrity (mock the RMAH all you want) and adherence to the genre that Diablo is a part of while continuing to innovate and iterate on the (largely dungeon-crawling cooperative) gameplay itself.
I hope you don't take my post as insulting or insinuating that the game isn't for you, but it's my read of Blizzard's posting thus far that they're really not trying to develop pvp for the above reasons. As an oldschool gamer this really doesn't affect me one way or the other, but I do feel it's unjust to simply rant on about blizzard's position in this matter as though it were unreasonable. To my thinking, they are actually being very reasonable about it.
This is what gets me (and perhaps I made my own thread on this issue too quickly ). There is no precedent at all for that level of organized or incentivized pvp in the Diablo series. Putting in those things just sounds like square peg into round hole of the n'th degree. Not only is it unequivocally a balancing nightmare to openly support that level of pvp (just take a gander at, if not WoW, any mmorpg or rpg game out there that promotes itself as having a serious pvp aspect), but it's not at all part of the genre.
PvP in oldschool diablo was a little amusing past-time that some people ply'd at more than others. Duel games were for having a little fun, talking smack, maybe wagering some gold (or stealing piles of it), but never to establish one's self as being a pre-eminent pvp player. People with that mindset hated the diablo series (at least the ones I knew) and had a lot more fun with other titles.
I would definitely not say "keep pvp out of the game," but diablo's very minimally developed pvp was part of the experience. You didn't come for the pvp, but if you did enjoy it, you had another little thing to toy with between mf runs, leveling, or other pvm activities.