The only possible detriment I could see to an individual loot drop is when everyone got to see that a ridiculous item dropped. I hope this individual loot is only implemented on bosses and their pack for that reason. Maybe not. I used to play with a "guild" of sorts and not really in degenerate pubbies.
Make Magic/Rare/Unique items all directly competitive.
Magic should have the greatest range of attributes, but not as many useful ones combined. Like huge +DEX bows, or high damage weapons.
At the very rarest, rares should be marginally better than magics, but only at the very rarest. Otherwise, they should have a lower-range of possible attributes, but more of them. One of the things I missed most was gambling rare rings after the overpowered uniques of LoD came out.
Uniques should have interesting or weird attributes that no other magical or rare items have, hence their name, uniques. I would like to see some uniques possess more -skills or -attributes in return for some huge bonus for a class. For example, some unique could give you huge +% against demons but take away a smaller -% versus the undead. This should be a place for interesting mods found on no other item. Many should be built with specific characters in mind, though not specific builds - for example, I want alot of stuff related to Tal-Rasha, etc. It really helps the player engage in the lore.
Sets should be incredibly powerful once completed, but they should "pigeonhole" you into a build, perhaps a build that isn't as powerful without the set, becomes way more viable with it. In Seven Lances, a Diablo II mod I played, there was a set built specifically for a healer-thorn type druid: not as powerful as you could get with Fury/Maul, but the set helped you become the "archetype" for the class. I'd like some elite-level set pieces to be extremely rare, but changed from Diablo II in the rarest set pieces are often useless, like the IK armor is.
Health globes are an awesome idea. Too many fights in Diablo II consisted of jumping straight into bad situation, and then drinking full rejuvs. Not really a great idea for using strategy and skills.
Here, because your health depends directly on your ability to fight monsters, it encourages alot more thinking and strategy because you can't blindly run in anymore.
You don't want a set "currency" in Diablo. Half the fun is trading up, and yes, even being screwed on trades. I remember when I traded up for my first IK maul when the ladder first started. You couldn't find a prouder druid on the realms.
Gold as a currency also leads directly into botting.
Two reasons:
1) Gold is much easier to find that magic items, so bots can be more successful killing easy mobs in areas that are easy to exploit.
2.) Though you can create some sophisticated bots to MF, people usually don't take the fullest advantage - why not? Because MFing bosses is simply more fun, so even though there is a tool available, people don't use it. Moreover, bosses require specialized strategies and harder areas that average programmers who create bots can't handle. Anyone remember the notorious firewall sorc? It was incredilby easy to farm the Frigid Highlands by taking advantage of bad pathfinding, but you still had a team to run Baal. A good thing.
Also, a barter economy fits much more with the atmosphere of the game. Sanctuary doesn't have a banking economy or any fancy-schmantzy places like that. This people are working to just LIVE from the onslaught of demons. An auction house should be out of the question, because it implies a life outside of battling the great evil that bedevils Sanctuary.
Fine. I'll spell it out for the truly dumbest of you, what they would call the profoundly retarded in medical speak.
When Starcraft was being developed, Blizzard used the Warcraft II engine more than necessary, and did not innovative and adapt that artwork for the Starcraft universe.
Because Blizzard was young and didn't have such a great reputation back then, it was criticized.
Now, almost the exact same thing is happening, except in this case, Blizzard has a sterling reputation. But you have to remember that no new games have come out since WoW, which has been a huge cash cow. So they might be myopic, or blinded.
Blizzard can commit the same mistake they did for Starcraft in Diablo III's case, slightly just modifying WoW's game engine and not fully capturing the mood of Diablo.
I remember the D1 Fanboys moaning and complaining when they first got a glimpse of D2. Blizzard proved them all wrong then, and will do so again. When have blizzard ever made a bad game? (Don't even think of saying WoW. 10 million people disagree with you).
BLIZZARD IS ALL-WISE AND ALL-KNOWING, OHM.
BLIZZARD NEEDS NO DIRECTION FROM THEIR FANS, OHM.
I AM A COMPLETE DUMBASS...UM?!
This is a picture of the very first alpha build of Starcraft that Blizzard presented, from the Wikipedia page on Starcraft:
It obviously draws alot of inspiration from the Warcraft II, a very successful game. What does Wikipedia say on this?
Wikipedia sez:
Blizzard Entertainment began planning development on StarCraft in 1995, shortly after the beginning of development for Diablo.[32]Using the Warcraft II game engine as a base (WoW?!), StarCraft made its debut at E3 1996. The version of the game displayed, assembled by the team's lead programmer Bob Fitch, received a rather weak response from the convention and was criticised by many for being "Warcraft in space".[33] As a consequence the entire project was overhauled, bringing the focus onto creating three distinct species. Bill Roper, one of the game's producers, stated this would be a major departure from the Warcraft approach, comparing its two equal sides to those of chess and stating that StarCraft would allow players to "develop very unique strategies based on which species [is being played], and will require [players] to think of different strategies to combat the other two species".[34] In early 1997, the new version of StarCraft was unveiled, receiving a far more positive response.
OH-EM-GEE. WOW. TO THINK, THEY MIGHT BE MAKING THE SAME MISTAKE THEY MADE IN THE PAST.
You morons can be "tired" all you want. I'm tired of seeing wankers drinking piss like it's wine. It happens. I don't bother them for it. YOU DON'T HAVE TO READ THREADS WHERE THERE IS COMPLAINING, YOU DUMB WANKERS.
Alot of people OBVIOUSLY CARE ALOT ABOUT WHAT THE GAME LOOKS LIKE. Yet ignorant fanboys, obviously buying the game with their mom's money, don't demand the utmost quality that we should demand of a long awaited game. THIS GAME NEEDS TO BE PERFECT. IT SHOULD BE THE SPIRITUAL SUCCESSOR TO THE DIABLO FRANCHISE, AS WELL AS INNOVATIVE.
Here are a series of questions that may make a few brainless imbeciles here think:
1. Is the art style important to the mood of the previous Diablo series? Yes or no? If yes, how important? Hugely or no.
Any idiot who thinks the art of Diablo isn't sharply different from other "fantasy" series can go hang himself from the Tree of Inifiuss. Balrogs look menacing and huge. Are you really NOT startled when you find a Goatman hiding behind a door in Catacombs? When a Stygian Doll runs up on you teleporting through Durance?
2. Is the artwork of Diablo III a big departure from the previous games? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY. So the big question that the Dev team must answer is - why? And call me cynical, I think it's more about bringing stuff that worked in WoW (to make more money selling to ppl with cheap computers), than it is preserving the SOUL of Diablo. The soul of Diablo is a horror fantasy with a great plot and graphics that move along that horror.
ANYONE WHO CAN'T SEE REASON FOR CONCERN IS A COMPLETE MORON.
Look at the gnarled tree on the far right. It's pure watercolor. The zombies aren't left white and red like say Doom, they had to add that blue-green sheen made popular in WC3. The trees remind me of Bill Waterson's (amazing) Calvin and Hobbes. The dungeon outlines are bold and blocky like the Warcraft universe.
Here's a close up so you can see it's not just a texture resolution issue. The dungeon blocks may be full of dents, but the surface is clean, smooth, shiny. Blue and green dominates and earthier reds are absent. You can see a characteristically oversized and blocky fire pot on the bottom left. The two small pyrmaid-like points have their edges smoothed over with light shading.
The lion statues....nuff said. But check out the oversized shoulder pads and bold armor outlines while we're here.
It is all very beautiful, but like or not it's a significant departure from Diablo. They call it a "hand-painted, epic" look instead of cartoon, but whatever it is, it doesn't communicate terror to me.
When I first bought Diablo and Diablo II I had hide the game from my parents (who are pretty religious) because they thought it was the route to be a Satanist when they saw the screens and box cover, literally thought it was an evil game. How awesome is that? Could this game draw the same reaction?
I really fear that Blizzard is going to inject what they learned from WoW into all their new franchises completely distorting them. I can understand it, for almost 4 years, from 2003-2007, that's all they've really been working on and focused on.
BUT ARE WE EVER GOING TO HAVE A UNIQUE ART STYLE FOR THE FRANCHISES AGAIN?
IS EVERY GAME GOING TO BE MADE WITH THE SAME ARTISTS?
By the golden year of 2003, Starcraft/Warcraft III/Diablo II looked very stylistically different, but it all worked and gave those franchises they're unique identity.
But they brightened up and blockified SC II. That's alright, because the core gameplay of Starcraft matters much more than the "mood" and Blizzard is always ton top of gameplay. But then they grittified it a bit and so the community took it smiling.
But this? Diablo? Almost the complete opposite of Warcraft? We aren't going to take it smiling and we aren't going to shut up about it.
Jeremiel, I almost want to kiss you that looks quite sweet.
But the thing is for true perfection they are going to seriously going to have to re-evaluate the whole style. I mean just look at the Bal-Rogs, how they are drawn compared to the image of the zombies.
Respeccing is incredibly stupid, I can't believe they are considering it. Isn't this exactly the opposite of a "non-linear" story, if you think about it? If there's an optimum skill distribution, and you have the possibility of choosing it any time, everyone will end up looking the same, wearing the same armor and items..
I want there to be that steady ramp in difficulty but Hell should be extremely difficult, with more strategizing about drawing mobs, encountering random dangerous situations...but not cheap shots like MSLEBs (Multi Shot Lightning Enchanted Boss)
You know the interior dungeon color doesn't bother me that much. I presume there was so much ambient green around because of the lighting's reflection off the water around the area. The game does seem to be a bit saturated, but I like the color palette just fine. It's the stylized portion IMO.
0
QUOTED FOR ALOT OF TRUTH
0
0
Magic should have the greatest range of attributes, but not as many useful ones combined. Like huge +DEX bows, or high damage weapons.
At the very rarest, rares should be marginally better than magics, but only at the very rarest. Otherwise, they should have a lower-range of possible attributes, but more of them. One of the things I missed most was gambling rare rings after the overpowered uniques of LoD came out.
Uniques should have interesting or weird attributes that no other magical or rare items have, hence their name, uniques. I would like to see some uniques possess more -skills or -attributes in return for some huge bonus for a class. For example, some unique could give you huge +% against demons but take away a smaller -% versus the undead. This should be a place for interesting mods found on no other item. Many should be built with specific characters in mind, though not specific builds - for example, I want alot of stuff related to Tal-Rasha, etc. It really helps the player engage in the lore.
Sets should be incredibly powerful once completed, but they should "pigeonhole" you into a build, perhaps a build that isn't as powerful without the set, becomes way more viable with it. In Seven Lances, a Diablo II mod I played, there was a set built specifically for a healer-thorn type druid: not as powerful as you could get with Fury/Maul, but the set helped you become the "archetype" for the class. I'd like some elite-level set pieces to be extremely rare, but changed from Diablo II in the rarest set pieces are often useless, like the IK armor is.
0
Here, because your health depends directly on your ability to fight monsters, it encourages alot more thinking and strategy because you can't blindly run in anymore.
One of the best ideas they've had yet.
0
Gold as a currency also leads directly into botting.
Two reasons:
1) Gold is much easier to find that magic items, so bots can be more successful killing easy mobs in areas that are easy to exploit.
2.) Though you can create some sophisticated bots to MF, people usually don't take the fullest advantage - why not? Because MFing bosses is simply more fun, so even though there is a tool available, people don't use it. Moreover, bosses require specialized strategies and harder areas that average programmers who create bots can't handle. Anyone remember the notorious firewall sorc? It was incredilby easy to farm the Frigid Highlands by taking advantage of bad pathfinding, but you still had a team to run Baal. A good thing.
Also, a barter economy fits much more with the atmosphere of the game. Sanctuary doesn't have a banking economy or any fancy-schmantzy places like that. This people are working to just LIVE from the onslaught of demons. An auction house should be out of the question, because it implies a life outside of battling the great evil that bedevils Sanctuary.
0
When Starcraft was being developed, Blizzard used the Warcraft II engine more than necessary, and did not innovative and adapt that artwork for the Starcraft universe.
Because Blizzard was young and didn't have such a great reputation back then, it was criticized.
Now, almost the exact same thing is happening, except in this case, Blizzard has a sterling reputation. But you have to remember that no new games have come out since WoW, which has been a huge cash cow. So they might be myopic, or blinded.
Blizzard can commit the same mistake they did for Starcraft in Diablo III's case, slightly just modifying WoW's game engine and not fully capturing the mood of Diablo.
DUH.
0
BLIZZARD IS ALL-WISE AND ALL-KNOWING, OHM.
BLIZZARD NEEDS NO DIRECTION FROM THEIR FANS, OHM.
I AM A COMPLETE DUMBASS...UM?!
This is a picture of the very first alpha build of Starcraft that Blizzard presented, from the Wikipedia page on Starcraft:
It obviously draws alot of inspiration from the Warcraft II, a very successful game. What does Wikipedia say on this?
Wikipedia sez:
OH-EM-GEE. WOW. TO THINK, THEY MIGHT BE MAKING THE SAME MISTAKE THEY MADE IN THE PAST.
0
Alot of people OBVIOUSLY CARE ALOT ABOUT WHAT THE GAME LOOKS LIKE. Yet ignorant fanboys, obviously buying the game with their mom's money, don't demand the utmost quality that we should demand of a long awaited game. THIS GAME NEEDS TO BE PERFECT. IT SHOULD BE THE SPIRITUAL SUCCESSOR TO THE DIABLO FRANCHISE, AS WELL AS INNOVATIVE.
Here are a series of questions that may make a few brainless imbeciles here think:
1. Is the art style important to the mood of the previous Diablo series? Yes or no? If yes, how important? Hugely or no.
Any idiot who thinks the art of Diablo isn't sharply different from other "fantasy" series can go hang himself from the Tree of Inifiuss. Balrogs look menacing and huge. Are you really NOT startled when you find a Goatman hiding behind a door in Catacombs? When a Stygian Doll runs up on you teleporting through Durance?
2. Is the artwork of Diablo III a big departure from the previous games? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY. So the big question that the Dev team must answer is - why? And call me cynical, I think it's more about bringing stuff that worked in WoW (to make more money selling to ppl with cheap computers), than it is preserving the SOUL of Diablo. The soul of Diablo is a horror fantasy with a great plot and graphics that move along that horror.
ANYONE WHO CAN'T SEE REASON FOR CONCERN IS A COMPLETE MORON.
0
0
I think not.
0
BUT ARE WE EVER GOING TO HAVE A UNIQUE ART STYLE FOR THE FRANCHISES AGAIN?
IS EVERY GAME GOING TO BE MADE WITH THE SAME ARTISTS?
By the golden year of 2003, Starcraft/Warcraft III/Diablo II looked very stylistically different, but it all worked and gave those franchises they're unique identity.
But they brightened up and blockified SC II. That's alright, because the core gameplay of Starcraft matters much more than the "mood" and Blizzard is always ton top of gameplay. But then they grittified it a bit and so the community took it smiling.
But this? Diablo? Almost the complete opposite of Warcraft? We aren't going to take it smiling and we aren't going to shut up about it.
0
But the thing is for true perfection they are going to seriously going to have to re-evaluate the whole style. I mean just look at the Bal-Rogs, how they are drawn compared to the image of the zombies.
0
0
0