Why in the world are they nerfing thorns stuff?
- Credge
- Registered User
-
Member for 15 years, 9 months, and 19 days
Last active Sun, Oct, 16 2016 18:03:57
- 0 Followers
- 308 Total Posts
- 2 Thanks
-
Dec 14, 2015Credge posted a message on New PTR Patch datamined! - Patch 2.4 December 11thPosted in: News
-
Jan 9, 2015Credge posted a message on Why Players Quit D3, Patch Soon?, GR 45 DH on 2.1.2There's absolutely no customization in this game. That's >the< reason why everybody is quitting.Posted in: News
It is not fun to only have one set per class be viable for an end-game that never ends. Great, I can beat T6 with no effort. I can climb the endless rift levels. I guess that's cool. Except in order to do that I have to use one set of items. I need specific rings. I need specific weapons. I need specific items.
There are no interesting mechanics in this game. The very core of the game is uninteresting and boring. Weapons are stat sticks that your skills modify the damage of based on a %. Why? Why do our skills do a % of weapon damage to begin with? Why are enemies in the billions of health? Didn't they realize the mistake that large numbers brings from WoW? They rectified the mistake there, yet, they're continuing here.
Paragon levels are fairly pointless except for a few 0DPS builds. Everything in this game revolves around how much damage you can do in as short a time as possible. There are few interesting skills and most of them boil down to what element type they are instead of interesting effects and modifiers. There are very few combos to skills in this game, and most of these combos are underpowered and useless. Almost all interesting skills deal insanely low damage and are absolutely useless.
Weapons are primarily stat sticks and are functionally redundant. Every single time they release a new set of things (unique gems, for example), there are two to three that are above and beyond better than all of the others. The development team can not come up with any interesting or effective defensive builds or items that don't revolve around completely disabling the enemies. Having to literally dodge every single attack that enemies fire at you is boring and uninteresting. The very gameplay they've promoted through absurd damage scaling has turned the game in to the exact same thing that it was at launch except now, instead of needing godly yellow items, we require very specific legendaries.
There's a dramatic lack of interesting gear in this game, and any interesting gear is made useless by the very mechanics they push on us. AOE life drain pants that do damage based on your life regen but remove life regen? Awesome idea! Completely useless!
The fix to the game is three fold.
1. Produce masses of unique equipment. It doesn't matter if they are godly or not. Every legendary should feel legendary. Stats are boring. Effects are not. Every single weapon that's in the game can be given an existing twinkly effect and a unique modifier or effect. Bam. You've got a hundred new weapons. Make existing set items not suck. Why would I take the Helltooth set when I have the Jade Harvester set? Zombie Wall is amazingly fun to use, but is completely useless with the game they've made.
2. Give us flexibility in builds. Sets force you in to specific modes of play. And, that's cool. The point of sets should be to make weak skills (zombie wall, as an example) become strong. They shouldn't force you to make builds around the set, they should give you more flexibility in what you can do with the limited number of skills.
3. The paragon system sucks and does not give actual customization or character growth. Every modern ARPG has a skill point system for skills. Give us the ability to actually make our skills unique and interesting with the paragon system.
And, I can't say it enough:
STATS SUCK! -
Nov 18, 2014Credge posted a message on PTR Patch 2.1.2 dataminedIt's interesting there are not Crusader or Monk changes here, especially with the reworked Monk set happening.Posted in: News
-
Mar 1, 2010Credge posted a message on Diablo III, Featuring BoEPosted in: NewsQuote from "Zoobi" »No single item in the game would be worth a high rune if there weren't dupes. I don't think Blizzard understands that dupes are what make the diablo 2 economy fail.
This. Remove dupes, the economy is fine. Items naturally lose value as more of them exist.
There's a reason SoJ's are the currency of choice in Diablo 2 :|. -
Mar 1, 2010Credge posted a message on Diablo III, Featuring BoEI've lost it. Blizzard has no idea what they are doing. BOE is a mechanic that is used when you don't want item decay to exist but you still want items to disappear over time so you don't have huge inflation on an economy and eventually end up with an economical oligarchy.Posted in: News
Except that will happen anyway because of the random nature of the games loot. BOE makes sense when X mob has a % chance to drop an item. This way, a player, or group of players, can farm said mob until everybody gets what items they want and then they turn around and sell the leftovers for profit.
So, unless Blizzard is telling us that Tal-Rasha has a 15% chance to drop Tal-Rashas Whip of Ancient Wrappings with this, they've essentially started down the path of an incredibly broken in game economy, an uninteresting small-group environment where hand-me-downs function to create equality amongst members, and a slightly less interesting single-player experience where a handed down item might complete a character build.
A better solution is to just have all items be BOP and completely ignore the economy altogether. -
Feb 7, 2010Credge posted a message on Properly Proportioned PauldronsIf you're 7 feet tall you don't need massive shoulder pads. You need shoulder pads that are proportioned correctly for your size.Posted in: News
Just because somebody is a giant doesn't mean that they use things that don't fit on their body. Those pauldrons were larger than his head. -
Nov 23, 2009Credge posted a message on DiabloFans Exclusive: Jay WilsonPosted in: NewsJay Wilson: In regards to the female counterpart, she'll be released soon. As far as exact dates go, I really can't talk much about them. A little news about the Skill Tree system should actually go up on our Twitter page pretty soon. About that, we've decided to remove the tree-type architecture and we are moving into a purely skill-based system. This new system is still in the development stages and if it does not work, we still have plenty of options to fall back on. Right now, we're just trying different things and getting a feel for the few ideas in regards to the skill system that we have going on right now. It differs from the World of Warcraft/Diablo II type hierarchical styles and is more of a skill pool/path than a tree per se.
In other words, you have trees for each skill.
K. -
Oct 1, 2009Credge posted a message on Diablo II Patch 1.13- More Delays, Hopefully a Brighter FutureThis sounds like the signs of a rushed patch =\.Posted in: News
-
Sep 30, 2009Credge posted a message on What Do YOU Want To Know About Diablo 3?This seems like a pretty simple question.Posted in: News
Will I be able to make characters that do not fit that classes archetype? For example, I could make a melee sorc or necro that was viable if I wanted to do just that. Alternatively I could make a barbarian that primarily used shouts, wards, and the like to dispatch enemies. -
Aug 29, 2009Credge posted a message on Bashiok on the Witch Doctor's "Zombie Dogs"Posted in: NewsQuote from "Kenzai" »
The problems are simple:
1) Might as well make a passive as you'll keep refreshing without even noticing.
2) You don't have control over changing the effect when they get in the way and you cast something on them.
All of this can be remedied by not having the AOE damage trigger it but the mouse-over-and-click-directly-on-top-of-the-mongrel method instead.
It's not a problem at all. -
Aug 28, 2009Credge posted a message on Bashiok on the Witch Doctor's "Zombie Dogs"Posted in: NewsQuote from "SFJake" »"Lets dumb down an unique mechanic because we can't deal with it, instead of trying to improve it and fix its flaws."
Thats all I saw there.
That's all I saw as well.
There are several ways to make the mechanic unique and interesting. For example, a flaming zombie dog could lose health over time (have a dot for the duration of the buff) while doing increased damage. This would make the witch doctor have to be a bit careful with where he casts his fire spell, increasing the strategy involved.
Because the game is still about strategy, right? Wasn't that something they drilled in to us at last years Blizzcon? Remember the skeletons with the shields?
Really, all this says is that "We don't want things to get all that interesting with this class. We don't want another Necromancer on our hands." Which, ironically, they already said =\. -
Aug 20, 2009Credge posted a message on Has the Tetris Inventory and Magic Find Returned?Yay at the inventory! While the one item takes one spot formula works for MMO's, it doesn't seem right in an action-rpg, especially when it's been a staple in the other two games.Posted in: News
That would be like removing peons from Warcraft 4. -
Mar 21, 2009Credge posted a message on New Battle.net Has ArrivedPosted in: NewsQuote from "PhrozenDragon" »I'm one of them. While the intention of steam is wondeful, I hate the fact that I have to have it on to play, and that I HAVE to have it patched to the latest version. Plus it's slow as hell to start, which doesn't make any sense.
I hope Blizzard releases Battle-net 2 with the intent of making it a complimentary software for online play, and not necessary for Singleplayer action.
Well, the only thing you need with Steam is to have it on. That doesn't mean you have to have it online, though in order to play offline you need to get online once every two weeks. I don't understand the patched to the latest version complaint.
However, I agree that it shouldn't be required. -
Oct 10, 2008Credge posted a message on Character Stat AssigningPosted in: NewsQuote from "Ivaron" »Think about what you just said. Because I could spot the flaw in that the moment I read it.
There is no flaw. Those who don't want custom stat allocation won't care about min-maxing a character and play for the simple pleasure of killing enemies. Those who do want custom stat allocation care about min-maxing a character and play for the simple pleasure of killing enemies without issue.
I agree entirely that the option should exist. -
Aug 7, 2008Credge posted a message on Diablo 3 Art Director ResignsPosted in: NewsQuote from "Oakwarrior" »Well, since they made us wait for 7 years, I'd say I can live through another year of delay. Because I don't really give a shit when it's released, I just want it released. Some time.
I'd rather wait an extra year for a product I'd buy than have it be released 'on time' for a product I wouldn't buy.
Those 7 years, guess what. They spent those 7 years going with different art styles. 3-4 of them.
Edit: Odd that they announced this on the 5th - my birthday. Hell yeah. Happy Birthday indeed. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
0
What? No it isn't. A cut scene is a part of a game where you have no control over your character. Period. It has nothing to do with your characters value or interaction with his surroundings.
If you have control of your character, you're not in a cut scene.
Something similar was in Diablo 2 in Act 5. It worked just fine.
0
I agree entirely.
_________________________________
The entire problem with economics in a game like Diablo is that there isn't a required cash sink, at least not one that's very large. In Diablo 2, the biggest cash sink were potions. Not exactly the biggest sink out there, especially because characters were largely self dependent.
A major issue with WoW is that there are very, very few cash sinks in the game. You've got a mount at 40, and then what? Epic mounts? None of these are required or long term solutions. They're short term cash sinks that are optional.
Games like the original EQ had it decently right. They created required items, like food and water, spells you had to buy, items you had to buy in order to cast some spells... just about everything that was essential to playing the game cost gold.
I see many problems with a Diablo 3 economy.
There is no way to level the playing field. Without required cash sinks (food/water, repairs, housing, etc), there's no way to remove gold from the world. This was the reason why trading in D2 was based on items and not gold. Gold was inflated to the point of redundancy. There was no need to have gold for anything other than repairs (lol, how inexpensive) and potions (lol again).
In order to make gold have an actual value, they need required gold sinks. They need some solid ways to take money out of the world, otherwise people will just go back to trading items for items.
The thing is, though, that there isn't a real way to do this in Diablo. There is no required housing, no food to buy, nadda. The only real way to do it would be to make repairs a required and expensive part of playing. The problem with that is that it's boring and luck dependent. If they make it too taxing on a player, no gold will reliably be made (not good). If they make it too lenient on a player, gold will inflate (not good).
And the summation of all Diablo trading is that it's dependent on luck. Heavily. Because of this there is no 'good' way to ensure that gold retains worth. The only way to stabilize an economy in D3 would be to lower the amount of random in the game... which just makes it duller than a bag of salt.
0
This pretty much sums up how I feel. The lack of details makes it look smooth, colorful, and very much like WoW.
0
Both of those games were fine. Hellgate suffered from no replay value and unfinished content and Mythos was a beta. Mythos was just a tad slow. It also lacked the scare factor that D1 and D2 had. Hellgate became less and less scary as you experienced the exact same looking areas against the exact same monsters every single time you played it.
Other than that, Hellgate had some of the best action in a game. In my opinion, it had the best gameplay of 2008.
0
It could also be the lamest boss fights ever with typical bosses that don't look intimidating.
"OH GOD SOMETHING BURST THROUGH THE WALL IT'S A... A larger than normal skeleton? Oh. And his name is King Leoric? Lame."
0
Can't say I agree about that. Putting your best foot forward is good... but usually only when your next few steps are around the same level otherwise you'll disappoint. Of course, a lot of what is and isn't awesome is opinion. Can't say I like the Barb but the WD and Wizard are both fairly awesome in regards to skills.
I don't think we've seen the best they have to offer yet though.
0
The entire discussion doesn't work in regards to Diablo. Humans are evil just as they are neutral and good in the Diablo universe. Really, the holy type spells shouldn't do anything due to humans not being holy beings. It would make sense to damage demons, heal angels, and do nothing to humans.
Of course, then you toss in the spell Holy Bolt and the entire conversation just doesn't make sense.
However, if there actually is a holy resistance, it probably means creatures will have holy spells.
0
2moons doesn't really play anything like any Blizzard game. This is a good thing for Blizzard, luckily.
Now, if D3 actually plays like 2moons... oh it'll be bad.
0
So we're going to see, maybe, 4 more attacks? Compare that to how many more passive skills?
I'm all for passive skills. I'm not for more passive than active skills.
0
http://diablo3x.com/classes/wizard/wizard-talent-trees
I'm finding the trees lacking skills. The Storm tree has 6 attacks. Arcane has 4 attacks. Conjuring has 2 (I can't read half of them). The rest are summons or buffs. That, to be blunt, is... disturbing.
Yeah, runes make the spells a bit different... but no, it's not the same. A total of 12 spells that do direct damage? 36 summons/buffs? Bleh.
0
If this were true I wouldn't have an issue with it.
The problem, though, is that I don't want to rely on a service that I don't like, didn't enjoy using, and found was terrible in order to play with my friends. I don't want to log in to a server to play a character by myself in order to catch up with my friends who played. I just want to play my single player character with them.
Let me be honest.
I'll never, ever play with anyone I don't know in real life. Not once. Not ever. Diablo players are generally terrible people online. Not that you guys are, but we make up like... half a percent of the Diablo players.
There's not a reason I would ever want to connect to a server to play a character I'd want to play by myself. I don't want to have to make every one of my characters online and play exclusively online just in case I decide "Hey, I want to play my Witch Doctor with you guys today instead of my Barbarian". If LAN exists, I can do this.
I can do this with open B.Net as well, but I have a feeling this won't exist.
You're also ignoring the people who change where they connect online, using different servers to play online.
You're not stopping piracy unless you require an internet connection to play A-La Steam. Otherwise, you're still offering a solid single player experience, which is what the real sell of Diablo is.
And even then, there are ways around stuff like that.
0
0
Dark has nothing to do with the color of your screen. Dark has everything to do with the mood set. What has been seen and played so far is not dark.
0
Blizzard has really lost touch.
0
There is no flaw. Those who don't want custom stat allocation won't care about min-maxing a character and play for the simple pleasure of killing enemies. Those who do want custom stat allocation care about min-maxing a character and play for the simple pleasure of killing enemies without issue.
I agree entirely that the option should exist.