How dare you try to troll me by talking about testosterone!!!! =D
In all seriousness you're correct it just turns into a flamefest and nothing gets accomplished.
LOL! Also in seriousness, I probably shouldn't have said that. It's just the "voice" of that post reminds me of some real life discussions I've had, where, you say something logical, then suddenly someone's entire head is bright red and they are standing over you bellowing nonsesne. Because apparently in their world really loud baseless insults trump logic any day.
OK, I'm ready to go back on topic now, and I hope I haven't offended anyone.
That seems non-cosntructive and completely backward to me. I think pretty much every point of debate from the PvP side of this discussion has been answered logically and politely at some point. And some PvPers have been rational and talked constructively too. Then you have posts like this. In my experience, when someone starts raging and trying to bully their way through a debate on cheep insults and testosterone, it is because they know they don't have answeres and fall back on intimidation.
Sorry if I'm being equally non-cosntructive, but the character of this post is just highly annoying.
I wanted to quote this post so that more people see it.
I basically agree with this person.
I am someone who enjoys the PvP aspects of games more so than the PvM aspect. This is the reason I play HoN and Dota 2. I love the Diablo series and I would say D2 is my favorite game of all time.
I am not asking for a game that is balanced as an eSport. I am asking for more freedom to play the game how I want to play it.
We want custom games
We want dueling
We want MUTUAL hostility
We want some kind of ranking or ladder for the arena system(we understand the game isn't balanced for PvP)
All of this stuff except the last was in Diablo 2. This stuff has been taken away from us and our ways of creating PvP content for ourselves is gone(ex: Iron man)
The arena system, while I think its an awesome addition to the game, pigeon holes us into a specific PvP style. Without proper tools we won't be able to play the game how WE want to play.
Random occurrences of PvP were always my favorite. Someone going hostile with you in a random game, you accept the challenge and smash it out with them.
What about the uneven matches. Going 3 on 1, 4 on 2, 3 on 2, etc... We can't do this.
This has been taken away and it makes me sad that this is the direction Blizzard is taking the game in.
I just hope I am wrong and that Blizzard is going to implement some of the things we want. Number 1 being custom games.
I don't see anything wrong with most of that, and I hope that we eventually get game types, mutual hostility, or duels. I especially like mutual hostility as an idea, because its so versatle. It can be used for 3 on 1, 2 on 2, 1 on 2, or 1 on 1. (Of course, there woud be friendly fire in team matches. You could fight at any regualr game location, cleared, or uncleared. It gives you the ability to duel, but without needing spammable duel requests to exploit and grief people with. I think that having this option would be nice in addition to arena.
And it's easy to implement. Just, if you have "Hostile" turned on, and the attack of another hostile player hits you, you take damage. The game just has to check two one bit flags. Simple!
But I disaggree on ladders. Many of us discussed why for a long time. If you rate people, you imply the game is a competitive, balanced, fair competition. When one or two classes and builds keep showing up at the top of the ladder, people will start complaining and there will be pressure to focus on perfecting PvP balance, which is a major undertaking.
If there was a ladder, the winners would largely be determined by how much luck teh player had on drops, or how much money they had to buy gear. The stats wouldn't really be meaningful.
Other than that, I think your ideas are fair, and hope they make it into the game.
I agree with this also allowing more open world pvp would be good rather than being cramped in a box and running around pillars.
The hostility games tho imo would need to be on seperate servers or flag the game as open hostility when its created. Some ppl dont wanna just be minding there own business only for a lvl 60 decked in full gear that they bought using there credit card dropping in a game going hostile and greifing ppl so they can feel superior.
I wanted to quote this post so that more people see it.
I basically agree with this person.
I am someone who enjoys the PvP aspects of games more so than the PvM aspect. This is the reason I play HoN and Dota 2. I love the Diablo series and I would say D2 is my favorite game of all time.
I am not asking for a game that is balanced as an eSport. I am asking for more freedom to play the game how I want to play it.
We want custom games
We want dueling
We want MUTUAL hostility
We want some kind of ranking or ladder for the arena system(we understand the game isn't balanced for PvP)
All of this stuff except the last was in Diablo 2. This stuff has been taken away from us and our ways of creating PvP content for ourselves is gone(ex: Iron man)
The arena system, while I think its an awesome addition to the game, pigeon holes us into a specific PvP style. Without proper tools we won't be able to play the game how WE want to play.
Random occurrences of PvP were always my favorite. Someone going hostile with you in a random game, you accept the challenge and smash it out with them.
What about the uneven matches. Going 3 on 1, 4 on 2, 3 on 2, etc... We can't do this.
This has been taken away and it makes me sad that this is the direction Blizzard is taking the game in.
I just hope I am wrong and that Blizzard is going to implement some of the things we want. Number 1 being custom games.
I don't see anything wrong with most of that, and I hope that we eventually get game types, mutual hostility, or duels. I especially like mutual hostility as an idea, because its so versatle. It can be used for 3 on 1, 2 on 2, 1 on 2, or 1 on 1. (Of course, there woud be friendly fire in team matches. You could fight at any regualr game location, cleared, or uncleared. It gives you the ability to duel, but without needing spammable duel requests to exploit and grief people with. I think that having this option would be nice in addition to arena.
And it's easy to implement. Just, if you have "Hostile" turned on, and the attack of another hostile player hits you, you take damage. The game just has to check two one bit flags. Simple!
But I disaggree on ladders. Many of us discussed why for a long time. If you rate people, you imply the game is a competitive, balanced, fair competition. When one or two classes and builds keep showing up at the top of the ladder, people will start complaining and there will be pressure to focus on perfecting PvP balance, which is a major undertaking.
If there was a ladder, the winners would largely be determined by how much luck teh player had on drops, or how much money they had to buy gear. The stats wouldn't really be meaningful.
Other than that, I think your ideas are fair, and hope they make it into the game.
I agree with this also allowing more open world pvp would be good rather than being cramped in a box and running around pillars.
The hostility games tho imo would need to be on seperate servers or flag the game as open hostility when its created. Some ppl dont wanna just be minding there own business only for a lvl 60 decked in full gear that they bought using there credit card dropping in a game going hostile and greifing ppl so they can feel superior.
That's what think is itneresting about mutual hostility. If both the attacking party and attacked party don't have Hostile turned on, the damage is jsut treated like friendly fire and attacks are ignored normally.
But just having open world hostile games would probably be even easier to implement.
One neat thign about mutual hostility though, would be the spontaneity of it. Like if you have been PvMing through the acts with a group for three hours, and get curious about eachother's skill levels and stuff, or just get bored, you could all jsut go hostile and have duels or a free for all or anything you want as a break. LOL. And anyone not intersted could jsut leave hostile unchecked and keep playing. Would be kind of cool and fun.
I wanted to quote this post so that more people see it.
I basically agree with this person.
I am someone who enjoys the PvP aspects of games more so than the PvM aspect. This is the reason I play HoN and Dota 2. I love the Diablo series and I would say D2 is my favorite game of all time.
I am not asking for a game that is balanced as an eSport. I am asking for more freedom to play the game how I want to play it.
We want custom games
We want dueling
We want MUTUAL hostility
We want some kind of ranking or ladder for the arena system(we understand the game isn't balanced for PvP)
All of this stuff except the last was in Diablo 2. This stuff has been taken away from us and our ways of creating PvP content for ourselves is gone(ex: Iron man)
The arena system, while I think its an awesome addition to the game, pigeon holes us into a specific PvP style. Without proper tools we won't be able to play the game how WE want to play.
Random occurrences of PvP were always my favorite. Someone going hostile with you in a random game, you accept the challenge and smash it out with them.
What about the uneven matches. Going 3 on 1, 4 on 2, 3 on 2, etc... We can't do this.
This has been taken away and it makes me sad that this is the direction Blizzard is taking the game in.
I just hope I am wrong and that Blizzard is going to implement some of the things we want. Number 1 being custom games.
I don't see anything wrong with most of that, and I hope that we eventually get game types, mutual hostility, or duels. I especially like mutual hostility as an idea, because its so versatle. It can be used for 3 on 1, 2 on 2, 1 on 2, or 1 on 1. (Of course, there woud be friendly fire in team matches. You could fight at any regualr game location, cleared, or uncleared. It gives you the ability to duel, but without needing spammable duel requests to exploit and grief people with. I think that having this option would be nice in addition to arena.
And it's easy to implement. Just, if you have "Hostile" turned on, and the attack of another hostile player hits you, you take damage. The game just has to check two one bit flags. Simple!
But I disaggree on ladders. Many of us discussed why for a long time. If you rate people, you imply the game is a competitive, balanced, fair competition. When one or two classes and builds keep showing up at the top of the ladder, people will start complaining and there will be pressure to focus on perfecting PvP balance, which is a major undertaking.
If there was a ladder, the winners would largely be determined by how much luck teh player had on drops, or how much money they had to buy gear. The stats wouldn't really be meaningful.
Other than that, I think your ideas are fair, and hope they make it into the game.
This is for arena discussion, nothing to do with dueling.
It's how you balance for pvp? I'm sorry you dont understand simple logic.
If you want to balance PvP you eliminate things that cause the imbalance.
if Gear is no longer a factor, Introduce PSR and MMR.
grats, you now fight opponents solely based on skill. Gear is not an issue. These are steps you take for balance.
The gear you earn in DotA, or the gear you earn in CS, is a direct result of you, and your teams performance in the game. You do not start with a gear advantage, this causes balance issues.
If you hit 10% harder than me? how is this a fair fight? If we both hit as hard, then it comes down to skill, and build. I should never lose to you in a PvP match because you spent IRL money on god tier items. This is not balanced PvP.
I aggree that it is what you would have to do to balance it. But there are problems. The gear is part of your build. Your skills and playstyle are largely supported by specific equipment decisions. So you are taking a lot of depth out of the game when gear is decided based on what is available within a match.
Also, Diablo III will never be taken seriously as a cometitive game.
1. It's a top down, single unit control, click to move game. This setup has some strengths but its not optimal for dueling or versus. People who are serious about player versus player are going to gravitate toward FPS, RTS, and other setups. So put design focus on something your game can't possibly be best at?
2. Dueling viability is not determined solely by skill (like in most competition games) but is instead largely determined by gear.
3. The gear in point 2, drops based on luck. So your dueling capability is also determined largely by the luck of the drop.
4. Even worse, you can buy the gear with real money. So you have a supposedly serious competition game, where the deciding factors largely money and luck. Does anyone see the inherent problem?
Diablo from the control scheme on up is designed to be a one versus many, or co-op, PvM hack and slash. It can not, and will not, be an esport. And Blizzard does have games built from the ground up for the purpose of esport. Starcraft series has always been a major player in esport. Diablo has always been the king of hack and slash pvm. Why jump product category with Diablo, to compete in a market segment that you already have covered?
D2 Dueling, WoW PvP eSport, SC1 eSport of a nation? SC2, eSport of a nation? WC3 eSport, which then leads to the creation of DotA, which leads to the creation of a new genre of PvP games known as MOBA. The ripple effect creates LoL eSport (although a joke) HoN, DotA and DotA 2 and soon Blizzard DotA
SC and Warcraft are irrelevent. They are different series, designed to be an esport. That's the point of having multiple series- so you can appeal to different player types. Saying Diablo 3 should have a strong PvP focus because Starcraft II does, would be like saying "Capcom should make Megamax XXXIII a tournament fighter, because street fighter was great."
If something is a direct sequel, with an actual sequel number, it should be a continuation. It should follow the design principles and focus of the series. In Diablo, development focus has been very much PvM. In Diablo I and II, a PvM was designed, and then a "Hostile" button was added for dueling, and that was pretty much that. But people enjoyed it. The point is that you don't have to have a highly tuned, perfectly balanced, PvP focused system, to make PvP an interesting element of the game.
Even if BLizzard decided to balance PvP seperately, I think people underestimate how much effort it would take. Look at Starcraft II. There are three races. Each are capable of building several units and several upgrades. Balancing all of it was probably a major part of the development. Now look at Diablo 3, with 5 classes, a crazy number of skills, then each can be runed, then gear that dertmines the strength of the rune effect. modifies the attack rate and damage, changes all your stats, etc, etc. Balancing that specifically for competition would be a massive undertaking, probably worse than the entire balancing phase of Starcraft II development.
Blizzard does not have unlimited resources. And think about this. This is not a subscription game. Blizzard takes in the initial sale price and RMAH fees , then they are responsiblle for tuning PvM, providing server space, security and hack ressistance. On top of that, they will be planing the expansion. Adding "seperately balance PvP to competition level tuning" to the list seems a bit unreasonable. It has taken so many years to develop this game. Do we want expansions and fixes delayed because the Diablo team is basically juggling resources to balance PvM and PvP at the same? It would be nice to have the best of everything but in the real world, you have to pick your focus and do it well.
I agree %100 and can not thank you enough for posting this. The PvE people are a bunch of assholes without any valid claims.
You're going to make a 1 line post that just calls people assholes without valid points, without MAKING any valid point or saying why any of the opposing points aren't valid?
Is the irony of that lost on you? Because I find it highly amusing.
As for the current state of the arena - it's in revision, and they haven't really said what they are planning. Look at some of the 11th hour changes going on with PvM in recent patches. If they are making major revisions in the content that will be ready for release, then the changes for the delayed PvP arena could be pretty serious.
As for "no more entering a random game and clearing it out and having fun" - that's very one sided fun. How much sense does it make for mid level characters to put up with levels 60s coming into their game and hunting them down? And how fun is it to even do that? There's generally not a challenge to it. The aggressor picks fights they expect to win. This doesn't need to come back.
As for ladders, if you implement them, you get this scenario.
-Game is balanced for PvM.
-As a result it isn't balanced for PvP.
-It's close enough balanced to be fun, but unbalanced enough that the same class and similair builds keep showing up at the top of the ladder.
-Peope start clammering for nerfs that break the PvM game, to balance the PvE game, or start saying "What's the point of a ladder if it's unbalanced, unfair and doesn't mean anything.
-In the end, it doesn't make anyone happy.
Until they release further details, we won't know what the game has to offer PvP oriented players. But I think you will at least get arenas, and maybe multiple game types (since they are delaying). In the end, what is wrong with auto match making? As your skill increases, and your win/loss goes above 50/50, you are matched against harder opponents. The system grows with you and you keep encountering better players and needing to improve. Or if you plateau in skill, you fight a variety of people at a similar skill level and win probably 50% of the time. How is that a worse system than just being able to run around randomly "ganking" people?
I do think they should be responsible enough to announce exactly what they plan to do with PvP, and how long they expect it to take to patch it in, before release. And I do think a dueling or limited hostile mode should be added. Also I think it would be good if they can work in multiple duel types and allow you to enter the match making system in parties. Arena should really be max of 3 vs 3 instead of having the 4 player cap that PvM games have. I wouldn't be surpised to see at least a few of those things hit with the PvP patch.
But, I'm going to say this again. PvE has always been the focus of development in Diablo. In fact, the "freedom" you experienced in Diablo II, was because Diablo I and Diablo II both started with a one button solution to PvP. You just go hostile. The arena and match making system show more consideration for PvP than it has ever recieved in this series.
Plus, for reasons discussed extensively in this thread, this game can never be a highly balanced PvP experience where games are fair and ladder rankings are highly meaningful. (Gear instead of strictly skill driven, RMAH to practically buy victory, etc.)
No one is out to ruin PvP. It is just that the majority of players want the game balanced specifially for PvM, don't want to deal with annoying griefers and hostiles dropping into cooperative games, and don't want PvP to become a huge drain on development resources, weekening the core PvM.
That's where you and I disagree though, I think you are incorrect in believing that the majority wants what you do. They don't .
It's a seriously small little minority of you that are so paranoid of Esports.
I don't think anyone's paranoid about esports. I think most people would be fine with Diablo working as an esport, if it didn't interfere with the main function of the game. Diablo games have always historically been designed as hack and slash action RPGs.
But there are serious obstacles to making it an esport. Character strength is decided as much by gear choices as by skill. That is a mark against making it a sport. Most serious competitive games are skill oriented. The fact that you can buy gear for real money makes it even a worse candidate as an esport. No one is going to take an esport seriously where the outcome can be largely determined by money instead of skill. Plus the characters themselves are geared for PvM balance. There's no way to take those same characters and give them esport level PvP balance, without giving some of the skills completely different stats and behaviors.
The Diablo series has never been designed to be an esport. When you ask for it to be one, you're not asking for the continuation of a strong PvP oriented tradition. You are instead asking them to totally change the focus of a long standing series, to match your personal expectations. The game is going to be a hack and slash RPG, with added PvP elements, like its predecessors.
That is not due to the whining of some "ignorant vocal minority." It is what the game was always designed to be, and what the series always has been.
its like... i used to love my old shitty car with 50 HP, and now i am angry that my new car only has 500 HP IT NEEDS 1892908290371482749274 HP........ AT LEAST!!!!!!!!!!!!
People have tried to word the above point at least 6 different ways today, but it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Totaly agree.
Let's break it down.
1. OP says PvP was an essential part of D2 and talks about how great the experience was.
2. The great PvP experience mentioned in Diablo II was essentually an afterthought, and the game was never specifically balanced for it.
3. Diablo 3 also has PvM prioritized balance, but instead of being an afterthought, PvP gets match-making and arenas.
4 Somehow, the argument is that they need to balance the game toward PvP to get an experience equal to Diablo II, which was NOT specifically balanced for PvP.
@VladDracul OP was basically saying that end game won't work without some vaible, enjoyable form of PvP. I think that D3 can deliver that. It's jsut that the game is partially gear based, and there is an RMAH for gear, so its never going to be an extremely serious esport. Maybe there should be ladders, but Blizzard probably decided against it to keep from accidentally implying that they are trying to make it a serious, balanced, competitive event. I'm fine with it either way, and I doubt many PvE players would complain about the existence of a ladder. Making blanket statements that we are all "jerks" is extremely unfair.
The only thing most PvE seem picky about, is the idea that when it comes to balance, PvE has to take priority. It's the core of the game and has taken design and balance emphasis in both previous games (or it seems so from my perspective).
@Edit - Not that you called anyone a jerk. That was in reference to the OP. This probably isn't the most coherent post ever. Just skip it if you want. LOL
I don't understand what the problem is - PvP will be added in a future patch, and there will be arenas, ladders, etc. It just won't be supported like an eSport, it'll be supported like it was in D2 - something fun to do to take a break from PvE
Exactly! This whole argument to turn Diablo 3 PvP into an esport, based on the idea that Diablo 2 PvP was important is illogical. It's like saying "Diablo 2's PvP was so good, that I won't be satsifed with something similair being offered in D3. Instead the whole game should be balanced around it, and it should be an esport."
It's simple. AI does not behave like a good player. So in an action based game, skills that work in PvE, will soemtimes be impossible to connect with in PvP. Some utility skills completely cahnge in terms of usefulness too. The problem this leaves, is that PvE and PvP are so completely different that you can't balance for both.
PvP will be in the game, its jsut notthe focus of balance. And really how balanced was PvP ever in Diablo II? I really don't know. I like cooperative play, so I never was very familair with the PVP aspect of Diablo II. But I was under the impression that it wasn't very evenly balanced either. Certain classes and builds will rise to the top, as usual. Also, since most of the PvP events are going to be team based, I think that will expand the options and leave it so that there are several viable builds for teams.
Then there is the RMAH. How can you make it an esport, when money has potential to be a bigger factor than skill? Look at Starcraft and Warcraft series games. Everyone starts the match the same. Look at chess. Both sides start equal. If you could throw 100s of dollars at Starcraft to buy in-game upgrades, would anyone take it seriously?
In short, PvP shouldn't be any less fun than Diablo II. As always you will be leveling up, then getting gear, then if you get bored and want to see how your character does in PvP, or build another character for it, you can. I just don't see the problem?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
LOL! Also in seriousness, I probably shouldn't have said that. It's just the "voice" of that post reminds me of some real life discussions I've had, where, you say something logical, then suddenly someone's entire head is bright red and they are standing over you bellowing nonsesne. Because apparently in their world really loud baseless insults trump logic any day.
OK, I'm ready to go back on topic now, and I hope I haven't offended anyone.
That seems non-cosntructive and completely backward to me. I think pretty much every point of debate from the PvP side of this discussion has been answered logically and politely at some point. And some PvPers have been rational and talked constructively too. Then you have posts like this. In my experience, when someone starts raging and trying to bully their way through a debate on cheep insults and testosterone, it is because they know they don't have answeres and fall back on intimidation.
Sorry if I'm being equally non-cosntructive, but the character of this post is just highly annoying.
That's what think is itneresting about mutual hostility. If both the attacking party and attacked party don't have Hostile turned on, the damage is jsut treated like friendly fire and attacks are ignored normally.
But just having open world hostile games would probably be even easier to implement.
One neat thign about mutual hostility though, would be the spontaneity of it. Like if you have been PvMing through the acts with a group for three hours, and get curious about eachother's skill levels and stuff, or just get bored, you could all jsut go hostile and have duels or a free for all or anything you want as a break. LOL. And anyone not intersted could jsut leave hostile unchecked and keep playing. Would be kind of cool and fun.
I don't see anything wrong with most of that, and I hope that we eventually get game types, mutual hostility, or duels. I especially like mutual hostility as an idea, because its so versatle. It can be used for 3 on 1, 2 on 2, 1 on 2, or 1 on 1. (Of course, there woud be friendly fire in team matches. You could fight at any regualr game location, cleared, or uncleared. It gives you the ability to duel, but without needing spammable duel requests to exploit and grief people with. I think that having this option would be nice in addition to arena.
And it's easy to implement. Just, if you have "Hostile" turned on, and the attack of another hostile player hits you, you take damage. The game just has to check two one bit flags. Simple!
But I disaggree on ladders. Many of us discussed why for a long time. If you rate people, you imply the game is a competitive, balanced, fair competition. When one or two classes and builds keep showing up at the top of the ladder, people will start complaining and there will be pressure to focus on perfecting PvP balance, which is a major undertaking.
If there was a ladder, the winners would largely be determined by how much luck teh player had on drops, or how much money they had to buy gear. The stats wouldn't really be meaningful.
Other than that, I think your ideas are fair, and hope they make it into the game.
I aggree that it is what you would have to do to balance it. But there are problems. The gear is part of your build. Your skills and playstyle are largely supported by specific equipment decisions. So you are taking a lot of depth out of the game when gear is decided based on what is available within a match.
1. It's a top down, single unit control, click to move game. This setup has some strengths but its not optimal for dueling or versus. People who are serious about player versus player are going to gravitate toward FPS, RTS, and other setups. So put design focus on something your game can't possibly be best at?
2. Dueling viability is not determined solely by skill (like in most competition games) but is instead largely determined by gear.
3. The gear in point 2, drops based on luck. So your dueling capability is also determined largely by the luck of the drop.
4. Even worse, you can buy the gear with real money. So you have a supposedly serious competition game, where the deciding factors largely money and luck. Does anyone see the inherent problem?
Diablo from the control scheme on up is designed to be a one versus many, or co-op, PvM hack and slash. It can not, and will not, be an esport. And Blizzard does have games built from the ground up for the purpose of esport. Starcraft series has always been a major player in esport. Diablo has always been the king of hack and slash pvm. Why jump product category with Diablo, to compete in a market segment that you already have covered?
SC and Warcraft are irrelevent. They are different series, designed to be an esport. That's the point of having multiple series- so you can appeal to different player types. Saying Diablo 3 should have a strong PvP focus because Starcraft II does, would be like saying "Capcom should make Megamax XXXIII a tournament fighter, because street fighter was great."
If something is a direct sequel, with an actual sequel number, it should be a continuation. It should follow the design principles and focus of the series. In Diablo, development focus has been very much PvM. In Diablo I and II, a PvM was designed, and then a "Hostile" button was added for dueling, and that was pretty much that. But people enjoyed it. The point is that you don't have to have a highly tuned, perfectly balanced, PvP focused system, to make PvP an interesting element of the game.
Even if BLizzard decided to balance PvP seperately, I think people underestimate how much effort it would take. Look at Starcraft II. There are three races. Each are capable of building several units and several upgrades. Balancing all of it was probably a major part of the development. Now look at Diablo 3, with 5 classes, a crazy number of skills, then each can be runed, then gear that dertmines the strength of the rune effect. modifies the attack rate and damage, changes all your stats, etc, etc. Balancing that specifically for competition would be a massive undertaking, probably worse than the entire balancing phase of Starcraft II development.
Blizzard does not have unlimited resources. And think about this. This is not a subscription game. Blizzard takes in the initial sale price and RMAH fees , then they are responsiblle for tuning PvM, providing server space, security and hack ressistance. On top of that, they will be planing the expansion. Adding "seperately balance PvP to competition level tuning" to the list seems a bit unreasonable. It has taken so many years to develop this game. Do we want expansions and fixes delayed because the Diablo team is basically juggling resources to balance PvM and PvP at the same? It would be nice to have the best of everything but in the real world, you have to pick your focus and do it well.
You're going to make a 1 line post that just calls people assholes without valid points, without MAKING any valid point or saying why any of the opposing points aren't valid?
Is the irony of that lost on you? Because I find it highly amusing.
As for the current state of the arena - it's in revision, and they haven't really said what they are planning. Look at some of the 11th hour changes going on with PvM in recent patches. If they are making major revisions in the content that will be ready for release, then the changes for the delayed PvP arena could be pretty serious.
As for "no more entering a random game and clearing it out and having fun" - that's very one sided fun. How much sense does it make for mid level characters to put up with levels 60s coming into their game and hunting them down? And how fun is it to even do that? There's generally not a challenge to it. The aggressor picks fights they expect to win. This doesn't need to come back.
As for ladders, if you implement them, you get this scenario.
-Game is balanced for PvM.
-As a result it isn't balanced for PvP.
-It's close enough balanced to be fun, but unbalanced enough that the same class and similair builds keep showing up at the top of the ladder.
-Peope start clammering for nerfs that break the PvM game, to balance the PvE game, or start saying "What's the point of a ladder if it's unbalanced, unfair and doesn't mean anything.
-In the end, it doesn't make anyone happy.
Until they release further details, we won't know what the game has to offer PvP oriented players. But I think you will at least get arenas, and maybe multiple game types (since they are delaying). In the end, what is wrong with auto match making? As your skill increases, and your win/loss goes above 50/50, you are matched against harder opponents. The system grows with you and you keep encountering better players and needing to improve. Or if you plateau in skill, you fight a variety of people at a similar skill level and win probably 50% of the time. How is that a worse system than just being able to run around randomly "ganking" people?
I do think they should be responsible enough to announce exactly what they plan to do with PvP, and how long they expect it to take to patch it in, before release. And I do think a dueling or limited hostile mode should be added. Also I think it would be good if they can work in multiple duel types and allow you to enter the match making system in parties. Arena should really be max of 3 vs 3 instead of having the 4 player cap that PvM games have. I wouldn't be surpised to see at least a few of those things hit with the PvP patch.
But, I'm going to say this again. PvE has always been the focus of development in Diablo. In fact, the "freedom" you experienced in Diablo II, was because Diablo I and Diablo II both started with a one button solution to PvP. You just go hostile. The arena and match making system show more consideration for PvP than it has ever recieved in this series.
Plus, for reasons discussed extensively in this thread, this game can never be a highly balanced PvP experience where games are fair and ladder rankings are highly meaningful. (Gear instead of strictly skill driven, RMAH to practically buy victory, etc.)
No one is out to ruin PvP. It is just that the majority of players want the game balanced specifially for PvM, don't want to deal with annoying griefers and hostiles dropping into cooperative games, and don't want PvP to become a huge drain on development resources, weekening the core PvM.
I don't think anyone's paranoid about esports. I think most people would be fine with Diablo working as an esport, if it didn't interfere with the main function of the game. Diablo games have always historically been designed as hack and slash action RPGs.
But there are serious obstacles to making it an esport. Character strength is decided as much by gear choices as by skill. That is a mark against making it a sport. Most serious competitive games are skill oriented. The fact that you can buy gear for real money makes it even a worse candidate as an esport. No one is going to take an esport seriously where the outcome can be largely determined by money instead of skill. Plus the characters themselves are geared for PvM balance. There's no way to take those same characters and give them esport level PvP balance, without giving some of the skills completely different stats and behaviors.
The Diablo series has never been designed to be an esport. When you ask for it to be one, you're not asking for the continuation of a strong PvP oriented tradition. You are instead asking them to totally change the focus of a long standing series, to match your personal expectations. The game is going to be a hack and slash RPG, with added PvP elements, like its predecessors.
That is not due to the whining of some "ignorant vocal minority." It is what the game was always designed to be, and what the series always has been.
People have tried to word the above point at least 6 different ways today, but it doesn't seem to be sinking in. Totaly agree.
Let's break it down.
1. OP says PvP was an essential part of D2 and talks about how great the experience was.
2. The great PvP experience mentioned in Diablo II was essentually an afterthought, and the game was never specifically balanced for it.
3. Diablo 3 also has PvM prioritized balance, but instead of being an afterthought, PvP gets match-making and arenas.
4 Somehow, the argument is that they need to balance the game toward PvP to get an experience equal to Diablo II, which was NOT specifically balanced for PvP.
5. That is completely illogical.
The only thing most PvE seem picky about, is the idea that when it comes to balance, PvE has to take priority. It's the core of the game and has taken design and balance emphasis in both previous games (or it seems so from my perspective).
@Edit - Not that you called anyone a jerk. That was in reference to the OP. This probably isn't the most coherent post ever. Just skip it if you want. LOL
Exactly! This whole argument to turn Diablo 3 PvP into an esport, based on the idea that Diablo 2 PvP was important is illogical. It's like saying "Diablo 2's PvP was so good, that I won't be satsifed with something similair being offered in D3. Instead the whole game should be balanced around it, and it should be an esport."
PvP will be in the game, its jsut notthe focus of balance. And really how balanced was PvP ever in Diablo II? I really don't know. I like cooperative play, so I never was very familair with the PVP aspect of Diablo II. But I was under the impression that it wasn't very evenly balanced either. Certain classes and builds will rise to the top, as usual. Also, since most of the PvP events are going to be team based, I think that will expand the options and leave it so that there are several viable builds for teams.
Then there is the RMAH. How can you make it an esport, when money has potential to be a bigger factor than skill? Look at Starcraft and Warcraft series games. Everyone starts the match the same. Look at chess. Both sides start equal. If you could throw 100s of dollars at Starcraft to buy in-game upgrades, would anyone take it seriously?
In short, PvP shouldn't be any less fun than Diablo II. As always you will be leveling up, then getting gear, then if you get bored and want to see how your character does in PvP, or build another character for it, you can. I just don't see the problem?