I don't NEED to trade with total strangers, I'll concede that. But I do NEED to trade outside of my immediate game and that concession must be made by the "people who trade are not playing legitly" crowd.
Regardless of how I feel about trading, and this proposed direction by the devs, I can concede this compromise too. Like I said...I want to trade. I believe killing monsters is the coolest way to get loot, yeah...but I also don't want to feel guilty about trading either. So in some way, I'm with you.
For them to find some middle ground, and allow free trade among friends and/or free trade in clans...that would be the best compromise, and I wouldn't just feel better about it, but I'd be proud to trade in an environment like that.
Between now and launch, that's where I'm going to hope it goes.
I'll say it since no one else will. I'd be fine with the drop rates staying the same as they are now, if only they "fixed" the loot. The roll ranges on Legendary items is so large, it seems that 92% of the time you get a Leg drop, it's useless. The roll range of an iLvL 60-63 Leg shouldn't vary from absolute garbage all the way to godly.
Apparently they're fixing this, as well, all Legs can roll at high iLvL's. Just these two things alone would make it seem like we're getting far more Legendary items. If they bump up the drop rate much at all, we're gonna be getting way too much. Our cups with run over, and I'm worried that they're gonna take it too far in a further desire to cater to noobs/casuals.
I was trying to say this before, but absolutely, this is the key that a lot of people are missing.
Legendaries are NOT going to be raining. It will SEEM like more are dropping, because DIFFERENT ones are dropping, but not all legendaries are the same. That's part of the problem with D3 as it is now. Some people, like Maffia, have barely found any, and with quality being so bad, the whole process of finding a legendary tends to bleed together. Since no legendaries really stand out as being special or desired or popular or "sought after," there's no awesome jewel in the distance that one hopes to get, nor are there any special hopes of gameplay changing.
In Loot 2.0, drops won't just be getting more powerful, they'll be more interesting, they'll be more diverse, they'll do more for peoples' characters than just raise or lower numbers on a stat page. And as such, more of them will be desired to hold onto. More of them will be viable to be stashed as gearing OPTIONS, as opposed to "well, this doesn't raise any of my numbers, so I'm trashing it...oh look, another one of these that never raises any of my numbers, I'm trashing it."
In regard to trading, I'll keep saying it...a free trade system may undermine the "killing monsters for one's own loot" scenario by a little ways, but it's still eons better, and more legit and respectable than fast tracking to Inferno MP10 in a couple hours by flipping two rares for a few hundred million gold and gearing to the teeth.
This is all else I'll say on this matter, I've probably spent more time in this thread than I should, ;-)
I personally believe that limits on trading, that would effectively kill 3rd party sites, cheapen other games that allow 3rd party sites to continue operating, and cause D3 players to engage and help each other acquire loot together, as opposed to just handing each other stuff, could be a very healthy proposal as well...however, even if they decide against that, and they don't make all legendaries BOA, free trading of most items would still be wildly better than the AH has been at any time since launch.
It would still cause people to engage and meet in-game and help each other and work together. Loot 2.0 will be a huge improvement in many arenas, and even if people are freely trading just about all items, people will still want to acquire collections of strong legendaries for, like I said, a wider variety of gearing options.
Which is part of what made D2 so much fun for so long. Experimenting with skill combinations, gear combinations, and making unique and fun builds and showing them off. That can happen in a limited trading scenario OR a free trading scenario. The differences, in that particular regard, are minimal.
Truthfully, I want to get more into trading, even if it's just with friends. I don't want to get every single piece from other people, but I also don't want to feel guilty that exchanging an item with someone is unfair. In a lot of ways, it's not...especially if people do what I tend to do, and that's give people items of higher "market value" than what I'm getting.
Most trades I've done, that's what I do...because most items' personal value to me is higher than the market value.
However, from a design stand point, it's Kevin Marten and cos. job to design a game where killing monsters is the best, most enjoyable way to get loot.
And I'm sure it was Dave Brevik's job to design a game where killing monsters was the best, most enjoyable way to get loot too... right?
The way you guys are talking about "killing monsters is the only real way to get loot" you'd think that D2 was the biggest failure in gaming history. Don't you think you're being just a TAD disingenuous and melodramatic about this subject?
EVERY ARPG of significance since D1 has had tradeable loot. Are you insinuating that, suddenly, the tables have turned and trading is not actually a part of the ARPG experience? If so, when exactly did that happen, and how come GGG doesn't seem to believe that? How come Blizzard is the only company that has to play nanny with its players?
People in PoE don't feel trading is fun, guess what? They don't trade. People in D3 don't feel trading is fun, guess what? They whine about it and ask Papa Blizzard to make the big mean bullies who are trading stop so that it doesn't ruin their experience.
The bottom line is no AHs = higher drop rates. No trading = higher drop rates. Higher drop rates = less "good feeling" about each individual drop. Fire up the console and see if you can play for an extended amount of time while still getting excited about drops.
The psychological effect is basically the same whether the game rains loot down on you or your friends rain loot down on you. Trying to differentiate between them to paint people who trade as "not real fans" because "killing monsters is the only legit way to get loot" is trying to make a semantics argument that has never existed in the history of ARPGs. It only exists now because it's convenient.
In all seriousness, I never heard anyone argue that loot should be BoA in D2 because people who got items from trading were somehow cheapening the experience of the entire community.
Okay, couple things going on here, shaggy...
1) No one argued that items in D2 should be BoA...because the amount of games with that kind of a mechanic back then was slim to none. It's not like today, where D3 enters the market surrounded by BoA alternatives. D3 came out last year, and entered a much different gaming landscape.
2) "How come GGG doesn't seem to believe that?" Simple. GGG is an indie company, GIVING Path of Exile away for free, not having to answer to shareholders, advertisers, and bottom lines. That's why. GGG can literally do whatever they want. I was playing PoE last night. They just threw up a new patch, and a few minutes before I stopped, a system message appeared, "There's a bug with how [forgot the monster name] is doing damage. Will patch it tomorrow." These guys have nothing to do beside work on PoE. Meanwhile, Blizzard has the WoW expansion going on, Reaper of Souls going on, Hearthstone going on, Heroes of the Storm development in the background, "Titan" whatever that is, and continuing to maintain most games that have come out in the past 10 years AND putting out fires that rage on a daily basis on D3 forums over off the cuff comments regarding trading. That's bloody why.
3) "How come Blizzard is the only company that has to play nanny with its players?" Why don't you take a look at the past year and a half of Auction House use. Honestly, I've hated hating the AH...on paper, it's a great tool and a great idea. And the AH itself doesn't sicken me nearly as much as how people have royally abused it to completely break the game, then when they deny their own responsibility, they complain that Blizzard is at fault. That's why Blizzard has to "play nanny" and apply rules. Because for the past 15 bloody years, Godly Plates of the Whale, duped runes and SOJs have been absolute joke. Does that mean that Blizzard should tie players' hands and keep them from trading outright? No. But the simple act of applying boundaries to corral a community packed with players (not all, but many many) who can't help taking every shortcut possible isn't wrong, in and of itself.
4) "The bottom line is no AHs = higher drop rates. No trading = higher drop rates. Higher drop rates = less "good feeling" about each individual drop. Fire up the console and see if you can play for an extended amount of time while still getting excited about drops." This, shaggy, should absolutely be classified as a personal opinion, as well as the accuracy. Yes, without the AHs, drop rates may rise. But that doesn't at all mean they'll raise drop rates because they're limiting trading on PC. And I sincerely hope you, and everyone else quoting console legendary drop rates have actually played the console to see how true or false that is, instead of taking everyone's bloody word for it. The reason that console players tend to get overgeared and bored isn't because drop rates are high...it's because (and I believe ruksak, among others, said this before) items on the console remain the same narrow scope of increasing stats and numbers, as well as having an extremely narrow amount of activities to do (outside of general farming, XP grinding, key farming and uber runs) and a very thin online community. Thus, of course console gets boring. Loot 2.0 will be boosting Legendary quality to not only increase numbers, but broaden the scope of what those items can do. Many of them will be build changing, game changing, and strong REGARDLESS of individual power. Thus, most people will keep and hunt a variety of them in order to have gear options, as opposed to "well, this is my gear, this is all i need, done." Like it is now. I haven't found any upgrades for my Monk in quite a few months. Most stuff I pick up, I either brimstone or vend. In Loot 2.0? That won't happen nearly as often.
Which begs the question... what is "winning" in Diablo?
No disrespect meant. And I actually am beginning to like the direction they're taking, and never spent a single dime on the RMAH, so I kinda agree with you.
But I don't understand the P2W concept in a game like this. Does it surface when people compare their characters? Do we even have "some" competition, even without ladders? Because we can compare profiles and character power? And guys like Archon, Alkaizer and Jaetch are "winners", and everyone else is a "loser"?
The same way you win or lose at any game. That's what games are - a test of your abilities. In D3 there are various ways to measure how far you've gotten. You spend hours because it eventually gets you somewhere. The disagreement lies in the fact that for some people the end goals are the why they play game and not the grindy process of getting there. Choosing to grind for 1500 hours to save $20 is not because I enjoy grinding. It's because that's how I believe the game should be played.
There doesn't have to be a competition of any sort for a game to be P2W. Imagine if Blizzard would start selling any legendary item for 2$. This is pay to win as how this business model is called these days. From the players' point of view it doesn't matter if you buy from Blizzard or a third party site. Effectively, it means that you are playing a P2W game.
Preferences and personal definitions of terms aside, the concept of rare drops and itemization as a whole are devalued entirely if there is an alternative way that circumvents the entire gameplay. For me gameplay is more important than people raging about not being able to share items with friends. It's not convenient, but with the new drop rates, your friends won't need your help anyway. If someone has never played the game before and a veteran friend introduces him to it and immediately showers him with a bunch of the most powerful items in the game and suddenly you just ruined hours and hours of potential fun for that poor guy who will never be able to experience the rush of finding their own rare item. If that was my first experience with any Diablo game, I would probably get bored fast and quit. It's not worth the convenience. Rather keep the higher drop rates.
Another thing I'm annoyed is when people say "But now there is nothing to do with items I can't use for my class and this bugs me!!!!!11" - Blizzard has mentioned on Blizzcon that there are unannounced item sinks, and you WILL have things to do with items you can't use. The decision not to increase stash size is so that people would have to evaluate which items are worth keeping and which items will be destroyed through whatever system (probably related to crafting) Blizzard has come up with.
This, very much agree, :-D
In the same sorta vein, Dimebog...a lot of people make the argument, "why does it matter how other people play, just play how you want." That does ring true...I'm mostly a solo player myself, so trading and the AH don't effect me much. Which is why I'm still able to enjoy grinding and farming even today, even with very little reward, :-) Because regardless of people trading and buying and selling like Diablo was terrorizing Wall Street instead of Sanctuary, I play how I like and I like how I play.
But like Dimebog says, in pay-to-win games, the more prevalent the mechanic is, the more it devalues simply HAVING that gear. Let's say a game REQUIRED you to put in 100 hours before you were eligible to enter some specific dungeon and acquire some helmet. The first thing people would think is how stupid it is, and anyone running around with that helmet, people would say, "oh, what did you do, leave your computer running all day while you were at work?" People would find any way they could of shooting a hole through it.
But in a scenario like Travis was proposing rather off-the-cuff, it just seems like there would be as little excuse or transparency as possible when getting a great item. There's no chance it was messed with, fudged with, bought unfairly from someone for cash...not saying that's necessarily a crime, but in terms of playing a game, it's still unfair.
Also, I'm not sure that trading will be needed less necessarily, due to better drop rates, a wider variety of viable legendaries and more avenues to getting them...in a way, it might change trading to be more for people who want sidegrades and alternate gear sets (which is what most endgame traders trade for anyway), rather than needing formal "upgrades." Between all the boosts to item potency coming in Loot 2.0, gear is going to be pretty friggin powerful.
If anything...I'd be looking to trade for alternative gear with friends or in public games, while farming for my main gear solo. :-)
Meeting in a trading game doesn't guarantee you a new buddy, doesn't even ensure the item you're getting is legit. It's just you taking the trader at their word that what they're giving you was fairly acquired.
Joining a public game doesn't guarantee you a new buddy. Therefore we should do away with public games.... RIGHT? Come on man, you have to know how flimsy and paranoid this argument is. OH LORD HE MIGHT NOT HAVE LEGIT ITEMS AND HE MIGHT JOIN MY GAME. Holy fuck! We should all hide under the bed and wait til the storm passes!
You may have already played in public games with people who have non-legit items. Is that going to stop you from continuing to join public games in the future? If not, you're not being very sincere about the subject.
I'm aware that public games don't guarantee you new friends either. I'm just trying to point out there are likely people who are okay with trading, but people who are against 3rd party pay-to-win sites. They're getting rid of the Auction Houses, which even you'll agree is a healthy change. And even though killing 3rd party trading isn't enough to warrant this kind of reaction (I respect that feeling), it still ensures that items and item spawning is more secure. MORE secure even than the AH intended on being.
And no need for the attitude. They could announce the removal or clarification of this BOA idea tomorrow, and I wouldn't care much. I'm trying to see the positives, while you're being paranoid of what COULD HAPPEN.
Or even, bare minimum, "here, I don't need this quiver, I don't play DH, you can have it." If that player keeps that quiver, the only use they have for it is to salvage it. They stand to gain nothing by keeping it if they don't need it, and if people have spent a lot of time salvaging in their solo games, they have more incentive to give away items they don't need to others who might.
You really think that's how public games are going to pan out? That people are just going to give you shit instead of holding it for their alts?
If this change goes through, there will be little trading in public games due to random matchmaking. Unless two people both find items that the other wants in that game... there's no trade to be had. The only way this system makes sense is among friends where I can give you an item today and you "owe me one" in the future because the liklihood of the two of us both finding something the other guy needs is pretty slim, even with increased drops.
So if this system works poorly among strangers, and only clumsily among friends who trust each other... why not just make a system that actually works WELL among friends? Novel idea, I know. Took me a whole 12 seconds of thought to come to that groundbreaking conclusion....
Again, why bother with an obviously-inferior solution when the answer is right there for everyone to see? Why justify a system that will not work decently in public games? Why not just remove public games, period, then? Do you really think that people are going to be giving away items in public games? I can see it happening infrequently.... if none of their other characters need it and they don't need the crafting mats, but not much beyond that, simply due to the fact that getting something in return is unlikely and the whole idea of trading is to engage in a mutually-beneficial swap of items, not to rack up IOUs.
Do I think that people are just going to give out shit in public games? Not en masse...but when I think of how passionately you've taken over this thread, shaggy, and think that people stand to benefit LESS in public games by hoarding their haul to themselves, when someone else in their game could have the perfect item they want, and all they have to do is communicate it and potentially give up an item they just picked up and didn't have time to develop an attachment to...then maybe! :-)
You say unless two people both find items the other wants, then there's no trade to be had. Truthfully, with the variety of great effects legendaries will have in Loot 2.0, and the fact that some people are still going to stick to their guns and only play one or two classes, there's going to items they don't want or care about. Thus, that's on-the-spot currency in a quick trade scenario.
In your 12 seconds of thought, though, not sure why you didn't bother to include the rest of my quote. If you get people putting together games with four people of the same class, that will undoubtedly take the most advantage of Smart Drops, which means easier decision-making when splitting up the haul, and deciding who needs what. Again...it's a possibility. Will it happen? You seem to be pretty convinced it won't.
Then again, if you're that certain trading is going to die, I'm not even sure why you're continuing in this conversation. You're deadset on them making everything tradeable, and honestly, without an AH, I'd be totally fine with that. I'm justifying it because when I really think about it, a change like this could yield healthier, more secure and safer interactions in games than a free-trade system would.
I agree with you that (currently, as is being speculated by Travis), it'd be a shame that playing solo wouldn't allow you to save an item for a friend. Like we both said, friend-only free-trading would be an absolutely great compromise. And between now and the expansion, there's plenty of time for them to reconsider that.
Meanwhile, I'm seeing a lot of positives in doing it this way, and while some of the negatives are fairly big, they're not without their alternatives.
And the idea of trading games turns into "hey let's farm and see what we get" as opposed to "jump in my game, I'll give you X, you give me Y, now leave me alone." I mean, not every trade turns into a friendship, a lot of times it's just business. I think Blizzard's thinking is...limiting trading to friends or players you play with regularly tends to yield safer foundations for new relationships, which yields more trust and communication in farming runs, rather than the dangers of simply trading with some stranger that could rip you off in the past.
That. That right there is a perfect example of what this change WOULD cause to happen in the game. Spend some time and think about how that would make you feel - what kind of game would you play, what kind of system of barter would you have with your friends, would you feel (as a group) that you had a successful night of playing Diablo 3?
Once you havet those thoughts in your mind, then compare it to the state of the game you play today. Is it better - is it worse - why?
Good statement there CardinalMDM
Thanks.
And exactly, this is the kind of thing I try and compare when thinking about D2 and current trading, as opposed to the potential this has...
On the one hand, if everything is tradeable (or 99.99%), people may meet in trading games, but trading and item acquisition is still seen mostly as business transactions. Meeting in a trading game doesn't guarantee you a new buddy, doesn't even ensure the item you're getting is legit. It's just you taking the trader at their word that what they're giving you was fairly acquired.
Meanwhile, when I think of this potential change, players aren't just treating item acquisition as a business transaction. They're not only working together to get items, but they're also taking time together to sift through everything they get to help each other. In a game session created solely for a trade, your focus is entirely 100% clear and focused on the item that's on the table. In this model, each player SHOULD have each other's larger interests in mind. Or even, bare minimum, "here, I don't need this quiver, I don't play DH, you can have it." If that player keeps that quiver, the only use they have for it is to salvage it. They stand to gain nothing by keeping it if they don't need it, and if people have spent a lot of time salvaging in their solo games, they have more incentive to give away items they don't need to others who might.
It opens up the floor for people to craft games where no two players are playing the same class, so splitting up the loot is nice and clear cut. Or, the other side of the coin, where games are populated with FOUR of the same exact class to maximize the chances of Smart Drops, all the off-class loot can just be salvaged and the mats split up, and whatever class-specifics drop can be handed out to those who are in need. Not to mention the potential for some really cool combinations of four different builds for maximum utility.
Honestly, this leads me to believe even stronger in one very important aspect...the players make the game great. Diablo 2 was great in some ways, but with age, it's becoming clearer to me how flawed it was. But on the whole, players made it an amazing experience, not just because of how good or bad some were, but because the legit D2 players found amazing ways to make the game experience really deep.
While this change getting done or not isn't a deal-breaker for me at all, I'm very curious to see just how the community would mold and morph to make the best of this.
The problem is this whole going to extremes shit. Why not just find the middle ground and please as many people as possible instead of going to the utmost extreme and wondering why it causes a firestorm?
But I think that's partially what they're doing by throwing some of these idea out there. I agree 100% with you that what Travis said was largely unprofessional, and something as hugely critical to this game as loot being BOA or not BOA is not something he should've even implied.
Much like you've been saying on this thread, shaggy (and I think ruksak as well), making our voices heard will cause them to take notice. Obviously, given many of the changes coming in the expansion, and the AH shutdown, clearly they've been listening and planning to make D3 turn a major corner. So, this comes out as a result of Travis Day's off the cuff comment. There's still time for them to reconsider and make changes.
Personally, I think such a trading change would end up being healthy for the game as a whole, but like I said in my other comment, for the sake of the community and the game in general, I think the devs would be wise to reconsider or at least tweak it. :-)
when you solo play you will look more for yourself and if you find an item that doesn't benefit you, you are more inspired to salvage it and potentially use it to help YOUR character.
Then when you are farming with your friends you can trade items that you find - because you've already played a bit on your own and took care of your character along the way.
This is kinda how I feel about it in general, like Polrayne here says.
In fact, this model actually gives people more incentive to trade away items they find in games with friends...because if they want to help their friends badly enough, they may not be able to outside of it. Meanwhile, when you play solo, your loot is all yours, to do with it what you like. Yes, it's disappointing to know a friend who could some insanely great item you get when playing solo, and you can't save it for them...but I'd like to believe that high end drops won't be "raining" like some people think...but at least they'll be more varied and prevalent than they are now.
But it's also LESS FUN to go months, and months, and months without the drop you're really looking for and have no way at all to rectify that.
Shaggy...
I'm glad you kept up with this thread, and said this, because with all due respect...it seems like this is the best argument anyone has to support them removing the BOA aspect from legendaries and sets.
And I'm not saying that because it's a bad argument, it's a good argument. However, personally, it's the only really great argument.
From what I've read, there will likely be other avenues to get legendaries, for instance, turning in Bounties (or a certain amount) may offer a selection of legendaries as a reward. So unless you're looking at Loot 2.0 and the expansion on the whole through the same perspective as CURRENT D3 loot acquisition goes, when the expansion all goes live, you have a far better chance of getting a legendary you want than you do now.
I do agree that this would hinder peoples' ability to really hone in on a specific build, but the way various legendaries can affect builds, I think Blizzard would rather people NOT steer toward specific builds, and instead, see what they can do with the combinations of legendary effects they get dealt. In regard to overall build diversity, it seems like a model that encourages people to think outside the box, and say, "yeah, I'm kind of a hybrid/this and that/etc. kinda build, as opposed to "gosh, I'm NEVER going to max out my DoT/AoE/CC, I suck!!"
In regard to the social aspect, again, you've made a good point...it would be a shame that you can't save an item indefinitely at least for a friend. Even if they made it so you can trade legendaries with friends indefinitely, but strangers only get a small window, I think that'd be enough of a compromise. I've seen you mention wanting to save items for friends over and over. And I think if a player is the type to want to help people out, then why not add people to their friends lists to open up trading? Honestly, it'd just mean that people would have to decline friend requests more often is all.
Overall, though, the social aspect is still prevalent with a 2 hour trading window, it just doesn't mean you can save up tons of legendaries and hand them out to whomever. And the idea of trading games turns into "hey let's farm and see what we get" as opposed to "jump in my game, I'll give you X, you give me Y, now leave me alone." I mean, not every trade turns into a friendship, a lot of times it's just business. I think Blizzard's thinking is...limiting trading to friends or players you play with regularly tends to yield safer foundations for new relationships, which yields more trust and communication in farming runs, rather than the dangers of simply trading with some stranger that could rip you off in the past.
I'll tell you, the AH has really caused me to dislike taking gifts, or even trading much at all, but like I said, do agree with some points and understand the bigger issues. I do think, though, that the positives COULD outweigh the negatives. No one likes change, but if people can find some alternatives within those changes, to meet the same ends or satisfaction, then the change is easier to take. For now, we don't know how this all will go. For the sake of the game (and not my personal views or tastes), I do hope they rethink the BOA issue a smidge...even if they stick with making, like, iLvl 73 legendaries pure BOA (or within that 2 hour window) and everything else is 100% tradeable...but I do think there are healthy positives that could come out of this.
Think about this...lots of games have 3rd party trading sites. By D3 basically killing its 3rd party trading of endgame gear, it effectively cheapens (even to some degree) other games and companies that continue to allow it. May not seem like a big deal, but opinions on the internet shift like wind gusts. On paper, this seems like an absolute dealbreaker for D3...but if those 3rd party sites aren't making as much on D3, they'll go to other games. Other games become more pay-to-win via 3rd party trading, those games suddenly become less fun to play because people are paying out the nose to feel godly for doing next to nothing. Suddenly, they're looking at D3 and thinking about how much more honorable it is to play that than other games where people are constantly cheating the system by trading outside the boundaries of the game.
Like I said, I don't do much trading, if at all...I was actually looking forward to trading some with friends in the expansion, and even if this change goes through, I'll totally still get to. I'm sorry that some folks, like you shaggy, have a hard time making appointments with friends to play online. So...play solo...find other friends who are on when you are that you can trade with, and when you get the items you want, make appointments to play with your real friends. You're not the only one with a job and crazy hours. Other people have that same problem.
We all get around it how we can, regardless of when we can trade.
Then again, I try and think about it...one of the reasons people like trading is that it can get them better items faster than just farming. So...if four strangers are in a public game, they all go out and do some Bounties and Rift Runs, it doesn't benefit them to just take what they get and run, one of the other three people in the game could have picked up something they need. Why not just ask "hey, anybody get X legendary? been looking for one."
This scenario is virtually impossible. 4 strangers play a game, one amazing item drops, player A gets it, B wants it. What could he offer for it? Cash? Gems?
Well, to be honest, everyone gets their own drops, first of all. That's how the game is designed. Everyone knows that, everyone has known that since launch. Thus, if Player B wants some amazing item that Player A got, it's still Player A's, and Player B has no right to get mad at Player A if Player A doesn't want to give it up.
Second of all, like Travis said in the video, "the exception is...if you're playing in a coop game with your friends, anything that you find in the same game as your friend you can freely exchange for a limited amount of time."
Meaning, trading isn't being eliminated, like some folks are making it sound. It's simply being fine-tuned so that you can't just collect 10, 20, 50 legendaries and hold them in your stash for months and months, til you find someone to take them, or you find someone with exactly the item you want. Either you're simply hoarding an alternate currency of high end items, or advancing too fast.
Travis also made a great point in the video..."some peoples' only experience with trading is that someone will jump into a game, drop a ton of stuff on the ground and leave." While this doesn't happen en masse, even friends giving friends huge upgrades does limit how much one finds (or is capable of finding) for oneself.
That's why trading is still being allowed between friends (unsure if that means people on each others' friends lists, or if it encompasses strangers in public games), because people like leveling characters and farming alongside one another. Yes, it is "social" to be in a trading game or a giveaway game or meet someone who hands you some massive upgrade, but in a way...it's more alluring and conducive to keep farming to watch a high powered character in action and get the item to drop yourself (or even alongside them), than to just have them hand you one of their 8 spares.
Blizzard just gave us:
Character permanence - you can't just flip item builds at the drop of a hat.
Unique characters - FOTM item builds will be less frequent.
No hacks/bots/third party sites
Chance of balanced PVP - there can be assumed strength progression based on time played vs statistical chances and std deviation.
Defined character progression - you can't just stack your little brother/ neighbor on their first day playing.
Additional reason to party up - 4 friends playing together is 4x the drops.
Yet you guys still whine and bitch. You guys will never be happy with this game.... if blizzard changed this to an exact D2 clone, people would scream about all the problems that were part of D2....
Wow. Very nicely said. :-)
Honestly, those are 6 major things people have been seriously complaining about since launch, and this type of change, along with Loot 2.0 in general, really does address all of them.
And really, it's not like you can't trade. Farming with friends lets you continue to trade. I'll grant people that it's hard to tell how public games will be in regard to trading, though. Most of the public games I've been in see people blazing through at light speed, because they feel epic enough to do so. So I'm having a hard time telling if public games in the expansion will have more of a community feel to them, and people being more pleased with the game will warrant greater sense of help and friendliness...or if better loot will just mean people will continue to be jerks hoarding it all for themselves.
Then again, I try and think about it...one of the reasons people like trading is that it can get them better items faster than just farming. So...if four strangers are in a public game, they all go out and do some Bounties and Rift Runs, it doesn't benefit them to just take what they get and run, one of the other three people in the game could have picked up something they need. Why not just ask "hey, anybody get X legendary? been looking for one."
I don't know! We could end up seeing some surprising cooperation in public games going forward. Just an inkling. We could end upseeing the idea of a "trading" game become more of a "co-op farming/trading" game...where people don't just jump into a game for an exchange, but instead, cooperatively see what drops, and everybody talks it over in town to sift through the loot to see if anybody needs anything in particular.
Sorry to point out - but they didn't say that they were removing TRADING from the game. They said that top tier legendary and set items would automatically be BoA.
What is a top tier legendary? We don't know.
I was thinking the same thing for a bit, but after listening to it a bunch of times...the way I interpreted it, unfortunately, is that they were considering legendaries and set items ALL to be the highest tier items in the game.
Obviously, I think if they meant that the highest tiers OF legendaries and sets were what was BOA, a lot of people will be heaving huge sighs of relief, but like I said, the way I interpreted it (and I could be very wrong) is that they were seeing legendaries and sets to the the high tier...not that the highest tiers of those two would be BOA.
Dunno why everyone is talking about finding legendaries that aren't ment for their class, when they said that they are going to implement the "smart drop" system where, the item will at least roll the main primary stat of the class you're playing. Yes the rest of the 5 affixes will vary but its highly unlikely that you'll get a Barb's 2 hander when you're playing a Wizard.
While i know not every legendary will be tailor made for your class, the chances of the above happening are very low with the new itemization. Keeping that in mind i'am okay with the legendaries and set items being soulbound (even though it will make completing sets almost impossible)
This is actually a really good thing to point out, I wasn't thinking of it.
Yeah, Smart Drops won't be a guarantee. The devs definitely pointed out it was not going to be a definite thing that ALL drops will be "Smart"...but a lot of drops will be tailored. Meaning, the chances of a Barb finding a Manticore? Not impossible, but...probably a teeny bit lower. The chances of a Wizard finding a Gazing Demise, probably a teeny bit lower. Etc. etc.
Obviously, that doesn't stray from the fact that on the off chance people do find off-class legendaries, that they'll want to trade them, but Smart Drops should be taken into consideration.
As well as the fact that Loot 2.0 offering build-changing legendaries SHOULD theoretically get people off the idea that they NEED incredibly specific legendaries to succeed. For instance, even if I'm playing my Monk and I'm searching for a particular fist weapon out in the field...if I find another that works in a different way, but I tweak my build here and there to make it awesome...what the hell do I care? I mean, that's a big aspect of what Loot 2.0 wanted to accomplish...making gear do things for your build that other items can't do, and increasing the quality of loot to the point that MOST legendaries can have phenomenal effects on your build if used properly. I'm sure there will be certain legendaries that end up helping certain builds work way better, but I think in this new landscape...while trading won't be AS necessary, in order for certain builds to work well, trading for insanely perfect pieces won't be as necessary.
That being said...getting all the pieces of SETS is a different animal. They showed that one Ninja DH set, which looks to have pretty cool effects, and in order to make that work, you need at least 2-4 of the pieces. Thus, unless Sets drop slightly more often in certain zones over others, farming pieces of Sets could prove harder without the freedom to trade freely.
Then again, people can just farm in groups. This system seems to realy encourage people to play in groups more than just hop into games for exchanges.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Regardless of how I feel about trading, and this proposed direction by the devs, I can concede this compromise too. Like I said...I want to trade. I believe killing monsters is the coolest way to get loot, yeah...but I also don't want to feel guilty about trading either. So in some way, I'm with you.
For them to find some middle ground, and allow free trade among friends and/or free trade in clans...that would be the best compromise, and I wouldn't just feel better about it, but I'd be proud to trade in an environment like that.
Between now and launch, that's where I'm going to hope it goes.
All right, I'm done, :-)
I was trying to say this before, but absolutely, this is the key that a lot of people are missing.
Legendaries are NOT going to be raining. It will SEEM like more are dropping, because DIFFERENT ones are dropping, but not all legendaries are the same. That's part of the problem with D3 as it is now. Some people, like Maffia, have barely found any, and with quality being so bad, the whole process of finding a legendary tends to bleed together. Since no legendaries really stand out as being special or desired or popular or "sought after," there's no awesome jewel in the distance that one hopes to get, nor are there any special hopes of gameplay changing.
In Loot 2.0, drops won't just be getting more powerful, they'll be more interesting, they'll be more diverse, they'll do more for peoples' characters than just raise or lower numbers on a stat page. And as such, more of them will be desired to hold onto. More of them will be viable to be stashed as gearing OPTIONS, as opposed to "well, this doesn't raise any of my numbers, so I'm trashing it...oh look, another one of these that never raises any of my numbers, I'm trashing it."
In regard to trading, I'll keep saying it...a free trade system may undermine the "killing monsters for one's own loot" scenario by a little ways, but it's still eons better, and more legit and respectable than fast tracking to Inferno MP10 in a couple hours by flipping two rares for a few hundred million gold and gearing to the teeth.
This is all else I'll say on this matter, I've probably spent more time in this thread than I should, ;-)
I personally believe that limits on trading, that would effectively kill 3rd party sites, cheapen other games that allow 3rd party sites to continue operating, and cause D3 players to engage and help each other acquire loot together, as opposed to just handing each other stuff, could be a very healthy proposal as well...however, even if they decide against that, and they don't make all legendaries BOA, free trading of most items would still be wildly better than the AH has been at any time since launch.
It would still cause people to engage and meet in-game and help each other and work together. Loot 2.0 will be a huge improvement in many arenas, and even if people are freely trading just about all items, people will still want to acquire collections of strong legendaries for, like I said, a wider variety of gearing options.
Which is part of what made D2 so much fun for so long. Experimenting with skill combinations, gear combinations, and making unique and fun builds and showing them off. That can happen in a limited trading scenario OR a free trading scenario. The differences, in that particular regard, are minimal.
Truthfully, I want to get more into trading, even if it's just with friends. I don't want to get every single piece from other people, but I also don't want to feel guilty that exchanging an item with someone is unfair. In a lot of ways, it's not...especially if people do what I tend to do, and that's give people items of higher "market value" than what I'm getting.
Most trades I've done, that's what I do...because most items' personal value to me is higher than the market value.
Okay, couple things going on here, shaggy...
1) No one argued that items in D2 should be BoA...because the amount of games with that kind of a mechanic back then was slim to none. It's not like today, where D3 enters the market surrounded by BoA alternatives. D3 came out last year, and entered a much different gaming landscape.
2) "How come GGG doesn't seem to believe that?" Simple. GGG is an indie company, GIVING Path of Exile away for free, not having to answer to shareholders, advertisers, and bottom lines. That's why. GGG can literally do whatever they want. I was playing PoE last night. They just threw up a new patch, and a few minutes before I stopped, a system message appeared, "There's a bug with how [forgot the monster name] is doing damage. Will patch it tomorrow." These guys have nothing to do beside work on PoE. Meanwhile, Blizzard has the WoW expansion going on, Reaper of Souls going on, Hearthstone going on, Heroes of the Storm development in the background, "Titan" whatever that is, and continuing to maintain most games that have come out in the past 10 years AND putting out fires that rage on a daily basis on D3 forums over off the cuff comments regarding trading. That's bloody why.
3) "How come Blizzard is the only company that has to play nanny with its players?" Why don't you take a look at the past year and a half of Auction House use. Honestly, I've hated hating the AH...on paper, it's a great tool and a great idea. And the AH itself doesn't sicken me nearly as much as how people have royally abused it to completely break the game, then when they deny their own responsibility, they complain that Blizzard is at fault. That's why Blizzard has to "play nanny" and apply rules. Because for the past 15 bloody years, Godly Plates of the Whale, duped runes and SOJs have been absolute joke. Does that mean that Blizzard should tie players' hands and keep them from trading outright? No. But the simple act of applying boundaries to corral a community packed with players (not all, but many many) who can't help taking every shortcut possible isn't wrong, in and of itself.
4) "The bottom line is no AHs = higher drop rates. No trading = higher drop rates. Higher drop rates = less "good feeling" about each individual drop. Fire up the console and see if you can play for an extended amount of time while still getting excited about drops." This, shaggy, should absolutely be classified as a personal opinion, as well as the accuracy. Yes, without the AHs, drop rates may rise. But that doesn't at all mean they'll raise drop rates because they're limiting trading on PC. And I sincerely hope you, and everyone else quoting console legendary drop rates have actually played the console to see how true or false that is, instead of taking everyone's bloody word for it. The reason that console players tend to get overgeared and bored isn't because drop rates are high...it's because (and I believe ruksak, among others, said this before) items on the console remain the same narrow scope of increasing stats and numbers, as well as having an extremely narrow amount of activities to do (outside of general farming, XP grinding, key farming and uber runs) and a very thin online community. Thus, of course console gets boring. Loot 2.0 will be boosting Legendary quality to not only increase numbers, but broaden the scope of what those items can do. Many of them will be build changing, game changing, and strong REGARDLESS of individual power. Thus, most people will keep and hunt a variety of them in order to have gear options, as opposed to "well, this is my gear, this is all i need, done." Like it is now. I haven't found any upgrades for my Monk in quite a few months. Most stuff I pick up, I either brimstone or vend. In Loot 2.0? That won't happen nearly as often.
This, very much agree, :-D
In the same sorta vein, Dimebog...a lot of people make the argument, "why does it matter how other people play, just play how you want." That does ring true...I'm mostly a solo player myself, so trading and the AH don't effect me much. Which is why I'm still able to enjoy grinding and farming even today, even with very little reward, :-) Because regardless of people trading and buying and selling like Diablo was terrorizing Wall Street instead of Sanctuary, I play how I like and I like how I play.
But like Dimebog says, in pay-to-win games, the more prevalent the mechanic is, the more it devalues simply HAVING that gear. Let's say a game REQUIRED you to put in 100 hours before you were eligible to enter some specific dungeon and acquire some helmet. The first thing people would think is how stupid it is, and anyone running around with that helmet, people would say, "oh, what did you do, leave your computer running all day while you were at work?" People would find any way they could of shooting a hole through it.
But in a scenario like Travis was proposing rather off-the-cuff, it just seems like there would be as little excuse or transparency as possible when getting a great item. There's no chance it was messed with, fudged with, bought unfairly from someone for cash...not saying that's necessarily a crime, but in terms of playing a game, it's still unfair.
Also, I'm not sure that trading will be needed less necessarily, due to better drop rates, a wider variety of viable legendaries and more avenues to getting them...in a way, it might change trading to be more for people who want sidegrades and alternate gear sets (which is what most endgame traders trade for anyway), rather than needing formal "upgrades." Between all the boosts to item potency coming in Loot 2.0, gear is going to be pretty friggin powerful.
If anything...I'd be looking to trade for alternative gear with friends or in public games, while farming for my main gear solo. :-)
I'm aware that public games don't guarantee you new friends either. I'm just trying to point out there are likely people who are okay with trading, but people who are against 3rd party pay-to-win sites. They're getting rid of the Auction Houses, which even you'll agree is a healthy change. And even though killing 3rd party trading isn't enough to warrant this kind of reaction (I respect that feeling), it still ensures that items and item spawning is more secure. MORE secure even than the AH intended on being.
And no need for the attitude. They could announce the removal or clarification of this BOA idea tomorrow, and I wouldn't care much. I'm trying to see the positives, while you're being paranoid of what COULD HAPPEN.
Evidienced here...
Do I think that people are just going to give out shit in public games? Not en masse...but when I think of how passionately you've taken over this thread, shaggy, and think that people stand to benefit LESS in public games by hoarding their haul to themselves, when someone else in their game could have the perfect item they want, and all they have to do is communicate it and potentially give up an item they just picked up and didn't have time to develop an attachment to...then maybe! :-)
You say unless two people both find items the other wants, then there's no trade to be had. Truthfully, with the variety of great effects legendaries will have in Loot 2.0, and the fact that some people are still going to stick to their guns and only play one or two classes, there's going to items they don't want or care about. Thus, that's on-the-spot currency in a quick trade scenario.
In your 12 seconds of thought, though, not sure why you didn't bother to include the rest of my quote. If you get people putting together games with four people of the same class, that will undoubtedly take the most advantage of Smart Drops, which means easier decision-making when splitting up the haul, and deciding who needs what. Again...it's a possibility. Will it happen? You seem to be pretty convinced it won't.
Then again, if you're that certain trading is going to die, I'm not even sure why you're continuing in this conversation. You're deadset on them making everything tradeable, and honestly, without an AH, I'd be totally fine with that. I'm justifying it because when I really think about it, a change like this could yield healthier, more secure and safer interactions in games than a free-trade system would.
I agree with you that (currently, as is being speculated by Travis), it'd be a shame that playing solo wouldn't allow you to save an item for a friend. Like we both said, friend-only free-trading would be an absolutely great compromise. And between now and the expansion, there's plenty of time for them to reconsider that.
Meanwhile, I'm seeing a lot of positives in doing it this way, and while some of the negatives are fairly big, they're not without their alternatives.
Thanks.
And exactly, this is the kind of thing I try and compare when thinking about D2 and current trading, as opposed to the potential this has...
On the one hand, if everything is tradeable (or 99.99%), people may meet in trading games, but trading and item acquisition is still seen mostly as business transactions. Meeting in a trading game doesn't guarantee you a new buddy, doesn't even ensure the item you're getting is legit. It's just you taking the trader at their word that what they're giving you was fairly acquired.
Meanwhile, when I think of this potential change, players aren't just treating item acquisition as a business transaction. They're not only working together to get items, but they're also taking time together to sift through everything they get to help each other. In a game session created solely for a trade, your focus is entirely 100% clear and focused on the item that's on the table. In this model, each player SHOULD have each other's larger interests in mind. Or even, bare minimum, "here, I don't need this quiver, I don't play DH, you can have it." If that player keeps that quiver, the only use they have for it is to salvage it. They stand to gain nothing by keeping it if they don't need it, and if people have spent a lot of time salvaging in their solo games, they have more incentive to give away items they don't need to others who might.
It opens up the floor for people to craft games where no two players are playing the same class, so splitting up the loot is nice and clear cut. Or, the other side of the coin, where games are populated with FOUR of the same exact class to maximize the chances of Smart Drops, all the off-class loot can just be salvaged and the mats split up, and whatever class-specifics drop can be handed out to those who are in need. Not to mention the potential for some really cool combinations of four different builds for maximum utility.
Honestly, this leads me to believe even stronger in one very important aspect...the players make the game great. Diablo 2 was great in some ways, but with age, it's becoming clearer to me how flawed it was. But on the whole, players made it an amazing experience, not just because of how good or bad some were, but because the legit D2 players found amazing ways to make the game experience really deep.
While this change getting done or not isn't a deal-breaker for me at all, I'm very curious to see just how the community would mold and morph to make the best of this.
But I think that's partially what they're doing by throwing some of these idea out there. I agree 100% with you that what Travis said was largely unprofessional, and something as hugely critical to this game as loot being BOA or not BOA is not something he should've even implied.
Much like you've been saying on this thread, shaggy (and I think ruksak as well), making our voices heard will cause them to take notice. Obviously, given many of the changes coming in the expansion, and the AH shutdown, clearly they've been listening and planning to make D3 turn a major corner. So, this comes out as a result of Travis Day's off the cuff comment. There's still time for them to reconsider and make changes.
Personally, I think such a trading change would end up being healthy for the game as a whole, but like I said in my other comment, for the sake of the community and the game in general, I think the devs would be wise to reconsider or at least tweak it. :-)
This is kinda how I feel about it in general, like Polrayne here says.
In fact, this model actually gives people more incentive to trade away items they find in games with friends...because if they want to help their friends badly enough, they may not be able to outside of it. Meanwhile, when you play solo, your loot is all yours, to do with it what you like. Yes, it's disappointing to know a friend who could some insanely great item you get when playing solo, and you can't save it for them...but I'd like to believe that high end drops won't be "raining" like some people think...but at least they'll be more varied and prevalent than they are now.
Shaggy...
I'm glad you kept up with this thread, and said this, because with all due respect...it seems like this is the best argument anyone has to support them removing the BOA aspect from legendaries and sets.
And I'm not saying that because it's a bad argument, it's a good argument. However, personally, it's the only really great argument.
From what I've read, there will likely be other avenues to get legendaries, for instance, turning in Bounties (or a certain amount) may offer a selection of legendaries as a reward. So unless you're looking at Loot 2.0 and the expansion on the whole through the same perspective as CURRENT D3 loot acquisition goes, when the expansion all goes live, you have a far better chance of getting a legendary you want than you do now.
I do agree that this would hinder peoples' ability to really hone in on a specific build, but the way various legendaries can affect builds, I think Blizzard would rather people NOT steer toward specific builds, and instead, see what they can do with the combinations of legendary effects they get dealt. In regard to overall build diversity, it seems like a model that encourages people to think outside the box, and say, "yeah, I'm kind of a hybrid/this and that/etc. kinda build, as opposed to "gosh, I'm NEVER going to max out my DoT/AoE/CC, I suck!!"
In regard to the social aspect, again, you've made a good point...it would be a shame that you can't save an item indefinitely at least for a friend. Even if they made it so you can trade legendaries with friends indefinitely, but strangers only get a small window, I think that'd be enough of a compromise. I've seen you mention wanting to save items for friends over and over. And I think if a player is the type to want to help people out, then why not add people to their friends lists to open up trading? Honestly, it'd just mean that people would have to decline friend requests more often is all.
Overall, though, the social aspect is still prevalent with a 2 hour trading window, it just doesn't mean you can save up tons of legendaries and hand them out to whomever. And the idea of trading games turns into "hey let's farm and see what we get" as opposed to "jump in my game, I'll give you X, you give me Y, now leave me alone." I mean, not every trade turns into a friendship, a lot of times it's just business. I think Blizzard's thinking is...limiting trading to friends or players you play with regularly tends to yield safer foundations for new relationships, which yields more trust and communication in farming runs, rather than the dangers of simply trading with some stranger that could rip you off in the past.
I'll tell you, the AH has really caused me to dislike taking gifts, or even trading much at all, but like I said, do agree with some points and understand the bigger issues. I do think, though, that the positives COULD outweigh the negatives. No one likes change, but if people can find some alternatives within those changes, to meet the same ends or satisfaction, then the change is easier to take. For now, we don't know how this all will go. For the sake of the game (and not my personal views or tastes), I do hope they rethink the BOA issue a smidge...even if they stick with making, like, iLvl 73 legendaries pure BOA (or within that 2 hour window) and everything else is 100% tradeable...but I do think there are healthy positives that could come out of this.
Think about this...lots of games have 3rd party trading sites. By D3 basically killing its 3rd party trading of endgame gear, it effectively cheapens (even to some degree) other games and companies that continue to allow it. May not seem like a big deal, but opinions on the internet shift like wind gusts. On paper, this seems like an absolute dealbreaker for D3...but if those 3rd party sites aren't making as much on D3, they'll go to other games. Other games become more pay-to-win via 3rd party trading, those games suddenly become less fun to play because people are paying out the nose to feel godly for doing next to nothing. Suddenly, they're looking at D3 and thinking about how much more honorable it is to play that than other games where people are constantly cheating the system by trading outside the boundaries of the game.
Like I said, I don't do much trading, if at all...I was actually looking forward to trading some with friends in the expansion, and even if this change goes through, I'll totally still get to. I'm sorry that some folks, like you shaggy, have a hard time making appointments with friends to play online. So...play solo...find other friends who are on when you are that you can trade with, and when you get the items you want, make appointments to play with your real friends. You're not the only one with a job and crazy hours. Other people have that same problem.
We all get around it how we can, regardless of when we can trade.
Well, to be honest, everyone gets their own drops, first of all. That's how the game is designed. Everyone knows that, everyone has known that since launch. Thus, if Player B wants some amazing item that Player A got, it's still Player A's, and Player B has no right to get mad at Player A if Player A doesn't want to give it up.
Second of all, like Travis said in the video, "the exception is...if you're playing in a coop game with your friends, anything that you find in the same game as your friend you can freely exchange for a limited amount of time."
Meaning, trading isn't being eliminated, like some folks are making it sound. It's simply being fine-tuned so that you can't just collect 10, 20, 50 legendaries and hold them in your stash for months and months, til you find someone to take them, or you find someone with exactly the item you want. Either you're simply hoarding an alternate currency of high end items, or advancing too fast.
Travis also made a great point in the video..."some peoples' only experience with trading is that someone will jump into a game, drop a ton of stuff on the ground and leave." While this doesn't happen en masse, even friends giving friends huge upgrades does limit how much one finds (or is capable of finding) for oneself.
That's why trading is still being allowed between friends (unsure if that means people on each others' friends lists, or if it encompasses strangers in public games), because people like leveling characters and farming alongside one another. Yes, it is "social" to be in a trading game or a giveaway game or meet someone who hands you some massive upgrade, but in a way...it's more alluring and conducive to keep farming to watch a high powered character in action and get the item to drop yourself (or even alongside them), than to just have them hand you one of their 8 spares.
Wow. Very nicely said. :-)
Honestly, those are 6 major things people have been seriously complaining about since launch, and this type of change, along with Loot 2.0 in general, really does address all of them.
And really, it's not like you can't trade. Farming with friends lets you continue to trade. I'll grant people that it's hard to tell how public games will be in regard to trading, though. Most of the public games I've been in see people blazing through at light speed, because they feel epic enough to do so. So I'm having a hard time telling if public games in the expansion will have more of a community feel to them, and people being more pleased with the game will warrant greater sense of help and friendliness...or if better loot will just mean people will continue to be jerks hoarding it all for themselves.
Then again, I try and think about it...one of the reasons people like trading is that it can get them better items faster than just farming. So...if four strangers are in a public game, they all go out and do some Bounties and Rift Runs, it doesn't benefit them to just take what they get and run, one of the other three people in the game could have picked up something they need. Why not just ask "hey, anybody get X legendary? been looking for one."
I don't know! We could end up seeing some surprising cooperation in public games going forward. Just an inkling. We could end upseeing the idea of a "trading" game become more of a "co-op farming/trading" game...where people don't just jump into a game for an exchange, but instead, cooperatively see what drops, and everybody talks it over in town to sift through the loot to see if anybody needs anything in particular.
That'd be pretty awesome.
I was thinking the same thing for a bit, but after listening to it a bunch of times...the way I interpreted it, unfortunately, is that they were considering legendaries and set items ALL to be the highest tier items in the game.
Obviously, I think if they meant that the highest tiers OF legendaries and sets were what was BOA, a lot of people will be heaving huge sighs of relief, but like I said, the way I interpreted it (and I could be very wrong) is that they were seeing legendaries and sets to the the high tier...not that the highest tiers of those two would be BOA.
This is actually a really good thing to point out, I wasn't thinking of it.
Yeah, Smart Drops won't be a guarantee. The devs definitely pointed out it was not going to be a definite thing that ALL drops will be "Smart"...but a lot of drops will be tailored. Meaning, the chances of a Barb finding a Manticore? Not impossible, but...probably a teeny bit lower. The chances of a Wizard finding a Gazing Demise, probably a teeny bit lower. Etc. etc.
Obviously, that doesn't stray from the fact that on the off chance people do find off-class legendaries, that they'll want to trade them, but Smart Drops should be taken into consideration.
As well as the fact that Loot 2.0 offering build-changing legendaries SHOULD theoretically get people off the idea that they NEED incredibly specific legendaries to succeed. For instance, even if I'm playing my Monk and I'm searching for a particular fist weapon out in the field...if I find another that works in a different way, but I tweak my build here and there to make it awesome...what the hell do I care? I mean, that's a big aspect of what Loot 2.0 wanted to accomplish...making gear do things for your build that other items can't do, and increasing the quality of loot to the point that MOST legendaries can have phenomenal effects on your build if used properly. I'm sure there will be certain legendaries that end up helping certain builds work way better, but I think in this new landscape...while trading won't be AS necessary, in order for certain builds to work well, trading for insanely perfect pieces won't be as necessary.
That being said...getting all the pieces of SETS is a different animal. They showed that one Ninja DH set, which looks to have pretty cool effects, and in order to make that work, you need at least 2-4 of the pieces. Thus, unless Sets drop slightly more often in certain zones over others, farming pieces of Sets could prove harder without the freedom to trade freely.
Then again, people can just farm in groups. This system seems to realy encourage people to play in groups more than just hop into games for exchanges.