I'm usually on board with Blizzard's decisions, but making followers lame/useless past normal is moronic, and the reason they gave us for that is even more stupid. I'm not gonna play multiplayer just because my merc makes me want to play multiplayer. It didn't in D2 and it won't in D3, specially since it will be useless in hell. I really don't understand that decision.
Exactly! I too cant understand why they made these choises? It's only a way of trying to force you into MP. You're being punished after normal difficulty if you dont go into MP. Blizz's first fail. Sorry to say this guys and i thought i never would says this.
No, it's not really a "punishment" since you're not losing anything you wouldn't have normally. You're just not being helped any more. I argue there is a difference in that.
Apparently they think they've done the right thing and, hey, it's their game to do what they want with. We wouldn't even have the joy of talking about it if it wasn't for Blizzard. Overall they're making great decisions, even if they missed the mark on this one (in my opinion). My only issue with the system is it seems sub-par compared to D2's merc system and I'm a bit surprised at that.
I still can't wait until this game comes out so I can see how little sleep the human brain can work on. Between a new baby, a 2 year old, a tired wife, work and d3 I should get no more then 2-3 minutes of solid sleep a night.
This entire thread is full of lengthy posts explaining exactly why this system is flawed based on nonexistent evidence and conjecture, so I'll get right to the point.
This system has been tested and iterated and retested by hundreds of people for thousands of hours already, before Alpha even started. Experienced Designers have been retooling and testing it and changing it again until it was damn near perfect, then improving it more. This is their job, and many of them have been doing it since before you put your grubby paws on Warcraft One.
To second guess them, without having even played the game, is criminally stupid.
If you wanted to keep your Follower until later in the game, that's different. Personal taste is one thing.
If you're making judgments about the specific workings of a system you haven't used created by people who thought of every single thing you have already (and more) years ago, that's another thing entirely.
Believe it or not, playing video games does not a Game Designer make.
Wait, did you just slip a yoda-ish saying in there at the end? lol.
I have to point out one issue on your statement above. You don't have to be knowledgeable about how a system is implemented to be knowledgeable on how it should work. I buy a car and I might not know *how* it works, but I know that when I push the gas pedal it should go, the break pedal and it should stop, the wheel makes it turn, etc.
The same applies to most things in life. The way things work is far more complicated then the interfaces that are used to control them. So to assume that we (we being a broad term for those of us who are discussing the follower's system) know nothing of how the system should or could work is pretty bold.
Oh, and believe it or not, being an avid gamer is a requirement for a lot of game development positions for a reason.
It's really interesting to read ppls opinions on this system, I never knew so many players were into the mercs in D2. I personally didn't care for them. I remember each time I got a merc from a quest I would try to get it killed as soon as I could. Only once did I actually put an effort into one basically just for something different and it was a bit of fun for a little while.
The Followers system actually seems perfect to me. I can see myself using them for a little while, have a bit of fun with them, but when I get into nightmare I would deffinately rather solo or co-op than have to rely on the followers. And they would deffinately not be good to have in co-op, it takes away from teamwork and strategy - thats the whole point of co-op. EDIT: just to clarify, it's not that I think they wouldn't be good for co-op, more that they would be rather pointless.
Also worth noting, every class is DPS related so not having followers on harder difficulties should be a non-issue (although I understand that some ppl just prefered playing with mercs through the entire game in D2)
Final thought - Having the system the way it is will, in my opinion, make players learn their character more and learn how they can compliment other team members better (a good thing!).
As i think been mentioned before, it's a balance issue.
There's 2 options really:
1. you make Followers strong and useful and the game too easy.
2. you make Followers weak and useless and the game challenging.
Now what Blizzard did was a compromise. They said that normal will be easy and the followers will be quite useful there, but on Nightmare and Hell difficulty they wont.
That said, the characters will be getting more and more powerful during that time and coop will really do the trick to have a game that's both challenging and doable.
Now the mercs in Diablo II weren't really needed, right? Try telling that to a sorc on hell difficulty without an act 2 merc with that runeword weapon that added conviction (that was the aura, right?).
Diablo II was full of imbalances. They grew on us over the years cause we played alot, but this doesn't mean that's a valid reason to keep them in the sequel.
Exactly. Considering the options I think they made the right choice. IMO they could've made them useful during early to mid Nightmare, but in Hell, if you want it to be constantly challenging, you'd have to balance the game around having followers or not having them. Theres no scenario where they're useful and don't factor into game balance.
That being said, even though obviously the vast majority of people here won't really use them, the majority of people who actually play D3 will. Most of my friends that I introduced to D2 only played through Normal once, maybe a few times. Most people see the end of the story as the end of the game, and if this system works as intended and makes people want to have a co-op partner by their side then it benefits everyone. The person who would've normally just played SP Normal and dropped the game gets more time for his money and we get a larger online community.
Obviously you can wish that followers were useful because you liked hirelings in D2, but keep in mind that the day the video was leaked all the rage was about followers being essential, and once they were announced as being non-essential all the rage was about them being useless. So obviously a compromise had to be made, and if you look at it from an objective point of view Blizzard clearly made a good decision.
Some people want followers, some people don't. That is a fact.
If followers are useful late game you force competitive players to take them because they want to be the best they can be. On Hardcore, if followers are useful you have to take them to ensure that you can survive the whole time, and that isn't fair to players who hate them. If you're a player who loves them, you can have them, but they won't help you. It won't hurt to take them along.
Is this an ideal solution? No, but its impossible to please everyone. Personally I am pleased with this because I as a player wanted to solo the game with an elemental/summon druid, and didn't want to have to deal with Mercs. This, in the patch that I last played that character, proved impossible, and it wasn't even hardcore. that is simply opinion though.
As a balance issue not having them be useful (and therefore necessary) for those who want to solo is probably the better choice because the classes are actually balanced (well, hopefully) and this allows everyone who wants them to enjoy the company but not the people who don't want them. It's a tough call but not everyone can be pleased and I know that many people are pleased with this solution (and I bet there are many people not posting who like it, because most people post only what they are upset about)
Also, If you are unhappy with this system, I am sorry you were in the group that got short-changed in this system. But there are other systems that are just how you want them to be hopefully and that you can fully enjoy, even while someone else is upset about those systems. That is the nature of these things. There are few games (perhaps none at all) that I am 100% pleased with, but that is because the producers want to incorporate things such that most people like the whole even if part of it really isn't what they are looking for. If there are no systems you enjoy, then don't buy the game, if there are some then enjoy those.
This is very similar to classes. I will probably never play the monk. I just don't like it, but I wont make a fuss about it because others do like it and I will enjoy the game even if I never use an entire class
Bottom line not everyone can be pleased by everything, but some people are pleased by this, so perhaps the best idea is to look forward to the good things and write this off a setback if that is how you feel.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If that made sense to you, Bravo! I think I even confused myself...
I dont see a reason why by hell mode we cant have followers who can live but the game isnt balanced around them. I also don't want them to be the solution for max Mf but that seems like a fairly easy fix. Make them unable to equip a MF item.
Well balancing them well is easier said than done. You'd have to take into account that its only one person getting all the loot, so that would mean that difficulty and loot would have to be fine tuned in order to make the effect of followers negligible, and if it sways either way they either become useless again or they are too good. So instead they just turned them into this incentive to play multiplayer and kept them in the part of the game where balance doesn't matter as much.
I have to wonder why they even bother with the follower system if it's intended for normal only and you cannot use them in multiplayer. I for one intend to never play the game by myself. To think I was all excited when this was revealed yesterday only to have my excitement crushed. Poor decision on Blizzard's part imo, hope they change it before release.
I say again: why is it that the followers being useless is better than them being essential?
Well I don't want them to be useless but at the same time they should not either become essential in the end-game!
I can understand a lot of reasons why you don't seem to support and like the current idea of the follower system and fair enough, I don't think it's perfect either. All I hope is that Blizzard will take their time and make these followers the best they can possibly be and so that in turn they will satisfy the majority of players and a broad range of said players.
Here's hoping constructive criticism will make Blizzard change and look at things that are not so good and change them around to do what I just said and hopefully in the end this system will prove it's worth and not be just "useless", wasted development time or very essential for the end-game
Why does it have to be one way or another? I'm not the first to say it but they could try and balance them into the game so they are usable at all difficulties. That doesn't mean they are essential to end game (they weren't in d2) but they were certainly another tool to be used. I'm sure it takes some work, yes, but I doubt it's beyond considering.
I don't have much more to say on this that I haven't already earlier in the thread, but I'm getting the overall feeling that most people don't like this system the way it's currently implemented. There is a lot of negative feedback, whether or not it's constructive, on this and other threads and many other forums.
But, if it comes down to having d3 sooner or waiting for a system like this to be revamped for another month, or whatever, I'd rather have the game as is. It's not a terrible system, just one that will be wasted on many players including myself.
I say again: why is it that the followers being useless is better than them being essential?
Because they are not looking for a mercenerie system like the D2 one.
And i glad they don't want to implement one!
The greatest problen, is, what the hell they are doing. Why leave a merc system in normal and remove it in the rest of the game? Why normal should have a extra feature ?
It adds a bitter taste in the game progression. Loosing something good, no matter what, is frustrating. Imo there are better ways to implement this system...
I created an account just so I could reply to this topic. I am a long time reader first time poster and I feel I need to state the obvious!!!
I wanted to point out something VERY important regarding the follower system: I believe Blizzard is taking a big shortcut in order to release the game sooner. Why? Think about it:
1.) No one sets out to design and develop a complex system (such as this) only for 1/3 of the game (much lower % of game time)
2.) Act4 of Diablo2 was obviously shortened so the game could be released (hence they've done it before!)
3.) Balancing nightmare and hell and end game with mercs is a huge task, think about it: Remember D2 mercs with high level runewords that gave negative magic resist auras etc. that broke magical immunities in hell? Basically what you end up with is REQUIRING twinked mercs just so you can do hell. I personally DO NOT WANT to rely on my merc if I dont want to. If it dies I dont want to be stuck not able to progress until it resurrects.
In effect Blizzard has decided it is just too hard to balance mercs end game such that they are a.) useful and b.) not a necessity. They want to release this year and BETA soon... so they have taken a shortcut and resigned this system to normal only, and invented some nice "reasoning" for the news media and websites to consume.
I created an account just so I could reply to this topic. I am a long time reader first time poster and I feel I need to state the obvious!!!
I wanted to point out something VERY important regarding the follower system: I believe Blizzard is taking a big shortcut in order to release the game sooner. Why? Think about it:
1.) No one sets out to design and develop a complex system (such as this) only for 1/3 of the game (much lower % of game time)
2.) Act4 of Diablo2 was obviously shortened so the game could be released (hence they've done it before!)
3.) Balancing nightmare and hell and end game with mercs is a huge task, think about it: Remember D2 mercs with high level runewords that gave negative magic resist auras etc. that broke magical immunities in hell? Basically what you end up with is REQUIRING twinked mercs just so you can do hell. I personally DO NOT WANT to rely on my merc if I dont want to. If it dies I dont want to be stuck not able to progress until it resurrects.
In effect Blizzard has decided it is just too hard to balance mercs end game such that they are a.) useful and b.) not a necessity. They want to release this year and BETA soon... so they have taken a shortcut and resigned this system to normal only, and invented some nice "reasoning" for the news media and websites to consume.
Cant wait for D3 and hope to see ya'll on bnet!
Good post. Might very well be the case.
Thanks. I just cant believe Blizz would set out through all these months of design (years?) to come up intentionally with something JUST for normal difficulty. To me it wreaks of something that is being short-circuited now that they are in balancing phase, "hey about that follower system...mmmmm yeah it just aint gonna work end game". It smells of a compromise to me!
No, it's not really a "punishment" since you're not losing anything you wouldn't have normally. You're just not being helped any more. I argue there is a difference in that.
Apparently they think they've done the right thing and, hey, it's their game to do what they want with. We wouldn't even have the joy of talking about it if it wasn't for Blizzard. Overall they're making great decisions, even if they missed the mark on this one (in my opinion). My only issue with the system is it seems sub-par compared to D2's merc system and I'm a bit surprised at that.
I still can't wait until this game comes out so I can see how little sleep the human brain can work on. Between a new baby, a 2 year old, a tired wife, work and d3 I should get no more then 2-3 minutes of solid sleep a night.
Wait, did you just slip a yoda-ish saying in there at the end? lol.
I have to point out one issue on your statement above. You don't have to be knowledgeable about how a system is implemented to be knowledgeable on how it should work. I buy a car and I might not know *how* it works, but I know that when I push the gas pedal it should go, the break pedal and it should stop, the wheel makes it turn, etc.
The same applies to most things in life. The way things work is far more complicated then the interfaces that are used to control them. So to assume that we (we being a broad term for those of us who are discussing the follower's system) know nothing of how the system should or could work is pretty bold.
Oh, and believe it or not, being an avid gamer is a requirement for a lot of game development positions for a reason.
The Followers system actually seems perfect to me. I can see myself using them for a little while, have a bit of fun with them, but when I get into nightmare I would deffinately rather solo or co-op than have to rely on the followers. And they would deffinately not be good to have in co-op, it takes away from teamwork and strategy - thats the whole point of co-op. EDIT: just to clarify, it's not that I think they wouldn't be good for co-op, more that they would be rather pointless.
Also worth noting, every class is DPS related so not having followers on harder difficulties should be a non-issue (although I understand that some ppl just prefered playing with mercs through the entire game in D2)
Final thought - Having the system the way it is will, in my opinion, make players learn their character more and learn how they can compliment other team members better (a good thing!).
Twitter: @FreddyBushBoy
There's 2 options really:
1. you make Followers strong and useful and the game too easy.
2. you make Followers weak and useless and the game challenging.
Now what Blizzard did was a compromise. They said that normal will be easy and the followers will be quite useful there, but on Nightmare and Hell difficulty they wont.
That said, the characters will be getting more and more powerful during that time and coop will really do the trick to have a game that's both challenging and doable.
Now the mercs in Diablo II weren't really needed, right? Try telling that to a sorc on hell difficulty without an act 2 merc with that runeword weapon that added conviction (that was the aura, right?).
Diablo II was full of imbalances. They grew on us over the years cause we played alot, but this doesn't mean that's a valid reason to keep them in the sequel.
That being said, even though obviously the vast majority of people here won't really use them, the majority of people who actually play D3 will. Most of my friends that I introduced to D2 only played through Normal once, maybe a few times. Most people see the end of the story as the end of the game, and if this system works as intended and makes people want to have a co-op partner by their side then it benefits everyone. The person who would've normally just played SP Normal and dropped the game gets more time for his money and we get a larger online community.
Obviously you can wish that followers were useful because you liked hirelings in D2, but keep in mind that the day the video was leaked all the rage was about followers being essential, and once they were announced as being non-essential all the rage was about them being useless. So obviously a compromise had to be made, and if you look at it from an objective point of view Blizzard clearly made a good decision.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
If followers are useful late game you force competitive players to take them because they want to be the best they can be. On Hardcore, if followers are useful you have to take them to ensure that you can survive the whole time, and that isn't fair to players who hate them. If you're a player who loves them, you can have them, but they won't help you. It won't hurt to take them along.
Is this an ideal solution? No, but its impossible to please everyone. Personally I am pleased with this because I as a player wanted to solo the game with an elemental/summon druid, and didn't want to have to deal with Mercs. This, in the patch that I last played that character, proved impossible, and it wasn't even hardcore. that is simply opinion though.
As a balance issue not having them be useful (and therefore necessary) for those who want to solo is probably the better choice because the classes are actually balanced (well, hopefully) and this allows everyone who wants them to enjoy the company but not the people who don't want them. It's a tough call but not everyone can be pleased and I know that many people are pleased with this solution (and I bet there are many people not posting who like it, because most people post only what they are upset about)
Also, If you are unhappy with this system, I am sorry you were in the group that got short-changed in this system. But there are other systems that are just how you want them to be hopefully and that you can fully enjoy, even while someone else is upset about those systems. That is the nature of these things. There are few games (perhaps none at all) that I am 100% pleased with, but that is because the producers want to incorporate things such that most people like the whole even if part of it really isn't what they are looking for. If there are no systems you enjoy, then don't buy the game, if there are some then enjoy those.
This is very similar to classes. I will probably never play the monk. I just don't like it, but I wont make a fuss about it because others do like it and I will enjoy the game even if I never use an entire class
Bottom line not everyone can be pleased by everything, but some people are pleased by this, so perhaps the best idea is to look forward to the good things and write this off a setback if that is how you feel.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Wise ElderFind any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
Strange. Sounds almost like D2 classic when mercs were useless.
It seems we are going backwards on this one sadly enough.
Twitter: @FreddyBushBoy
Why does it have to be one way or another? I'm not the first to say it but they could try and balance them into the game so they are usable at all difficulties. That doesn't mean they are essential to end game (they weren't in d2) but they were certainly another tool to be used. I'm sure it takes some work, yes, but I doubt it's beyond considering.
I don't have much more to say on this that I haven't already earlier in the thread, but I'm getting the overall feeling that most people don't like this system the way it's currently implemented. There is a lot of negative feedback, whether or not it's constructive, on this and other threads and many other forums.
But, if it comes down to having d3 sooner or waiting for a system like this to be revamped for another month, or whatever, I'd rather have the game as is. It's not a terrible system, just one that will be wasted on many players including myself.
Because they are not looking for a mercenerie system like the D2 one.
And i glad they don't want to implement one!
The greatest problen, is, what the hell they are doing. Why leave a merc system in normal and remove it in the rest of the game? Why normal should have a extra feature ?
It adds a bitter taste in the game progression. Loosing something good, no matter what, is frustrating. Imo there are better ways to implement this system...
I wanted to point out something VERY important regarding the follower system: I believe Blizzard is taking a big shortcut in order to release the game sooner. Why? Think about it:
1.) No one sets out to design and develop a complex system (such as this) only for 1/3 of the game (much lower % of game time)
2.) Act4 of Diablo2 was obviously shortened so the game could be released (hence they've done it before!)
3.) Balancing nightmare and hell and end game with mercs is a huge task, think about it: Remember D2 mercs with high level runewords that gave negative magic resist auras etc. that broke magical immunities in hell? Basically what you end up with is REQUIRING twinked mercs just so you can do hell. I personally DO NOT WANT to rely on my merc if I dont want to. If it dies I dont want to be stuck not able to progress until it resurrects.
In effect Blizzard has decided it is just too hard to balance mercs end game such that they are a.) useful and b.) not a necessity. They want to release this year and BETA soon... so they have taken a shortcut and resigned this system to normal only, and invented some nice "reasoning" for the news media and websites to consume.
Cant wait for D3 and hope to see ya'll on bnet!
Thanks. I just cant believe Blizz would set out through all these months of design (years?) to come up intentionally with something JUST for normal difficulty. To me it wreaks of something that is being short-circuited now that they are in balancing phase, "hey about that follower system...mmmmm yeah it just aint gonna work end game". It smells of a compromise to me!