_________________________________________________________
*Estimated level of security - How protective will Diablo 3 and Battle.net 2.0 in general be when it comes to hacks, bots, cheats etc. Originally Posted by Romak , Post #16
_________________________________________________________
In Diablo II, if you took the time to really enjoy every detail, playing it the second time around, there was a feel of 'I know what to do next. I remember this guy was here, I know I have to do this to get to this.' It didn't even take 3 or 4 completions.
How is Diablo III going to improve upon that if at all? Originally Posted by USNSEALs , Post #31
_________________________________________________________
My question would be: is there going to be a world drop table that is different from the loot we get from bosses and minibosses. Is there going to be incentive to go around and fight monsters in different areas or is it just going to come down to grinding a couple of bosses with no specific loot tables at all. In other words, are they going to reward the player for exploring all areas in the game, and are there going to be more specific loot tables so that casters, for example, know generally where to look for items. Is there going to be a variety in what to kill and what loot to get? You get the idea - if you can rephrase this paragraph into one concise question that would be nice since I couldn't. Originally Posted by Dimebog, Post #33
_________________________________________________________
To what extent has God of War affected Diablo III's gameplay? Will we see combos, fatalities, and minigame monster fights all thrown in to keep the combat fresh for meleers? Originally Posted by Arkilae, Post #38
_________________________________________________________
- Will blizzard be releasing a playable demo of diablo 3 prior too full release off the game??? Originally Posted by Carnage665, Post #40
_________________________________________________________
-Is there a night/day progression when outside? because that would be awesome.and if so, would it affect creatures?!Originally Posted by Lord Petrov, Post #58
*I acknoledge the fact that I edited the question slightly, and hope it does not offend the original composer*_________________________________________________________
Will there be a Hardcore Mode, and if so: how would it work with health orbs instead of potions? I can see how you might lose a Hardcore character just because of bad luck in D3, whereas in D2 it was usually carelessness or lack or strategy. Originally Posted by Ivaron, Post #87
_________________________________________________________
If a player feels like a change of environment, will there will an incentive to go back to previous acts or parts in the story and find new content unlocked there? Originally Posted by Ivaron, Post #87
_________________________________________________________
PS: Couldn't find a good 10th one that I found appropriate so decided to stick my own post for last as a filler...
#2. Reminiscent of Diablo 2 Ladder lag spikes that were happening all over the realms, what is Blizz going to do to prevent a higher definition, 3D, Diablo 3 from once again lagging the normal player out of a fun experience? Originally Posted by Mattheo_Majik, Post #7
_________________________________________________________
PPS: To explain the logic of my choices on this is as following; It isn't that most questions weren't clever or interesting, however I tried picking the questions that were more or less unlikely to get revealed/answered during BlizzCon or any question that would be considered a "Spoiler" such as prematurely revealing next chars or story plot, etc. I was concentrating on gaming issues that I think held significant meaning to the creation of a balanced and replayable game. I strongly believe in helping Blizzard point out system issues rather than giving fans and media more fodder and spoilers on D3, that is more likely than not, going to be revealed along the course of the game's development anyways.
--------------------------- EDIT (merging a double-post) -----------------------------
Quote fromOne of the only reason I used about 2 or 3 of my questions is because half the questions asked on the thread(to choose from) have been answered in interviews and in other ways already. I did not want to vote for wasted questions, as for the other half, I chose some I thought to be the best ones, but seeing as I play singleplayer, I do not care about PvP or any other Battlenet/online questions. I do get your point though some people chose almost purely their own questions, (which is too bad, there were some good questions there) I hope the good questions are chosen to be asked.
(sorry for being off topic, but this thread is kind of dead anyways, the one above it has about 4 times the views and almost twice the responses (also a shame). (delete post if necessary, Thanks for giving us all the D3 updates and going to Blizzcon, hope you guys have fun/stay safe.
Although it is expected to have less views in the fact that unless your posting your effort to help D3, this thread will mainly be read by Moderators. However....
What you said is RIGH. It is a shame that this post out of all posts should be ignored because it's threads like these that really could affect and help a great deal in the development of D3. Thus truly showing that most people only care to read news and pointlessly debate on obsolete ideas when they could make a real difference over here...
. No one is calling anyone names and judging people and by no means did I imply or even hint of someone being an idiot for not choosing to follow a line of thought. I certainly disagree with some people but wouldn't stoop as low as to go name calling... Just making comments and thats all. If it offended you then I formally apologize and tell you that it was not at all my intent. Just to set things clear:offtopic:
0
0
So try less face palming when your reading, it really helps.
So who said you would need to use BO as much as WW to level it up. It's obvious that an attack skill would be used more, consequently it's leveling speed wouldn't be identical as to that of a passive or a Defensive one... I shouldn't even have to explain this, any reasoning being could come to this conclusion...
Different % of exp gain through usage of different MAJOR skill types such as Offensive vs Defensive vs Passives. So where's the problem>?
If you don't continuously need a healing spell WTF would you want to level it up for anyways... Could you come up with a logical example to demonstrate that their system is COMPLETELY flawed?
No one said it had to be identical to Dungeon Siege. Just a system based on the mechanics of exp gain through usage.
Easy, every time you reach a new level, they take into consideration every single skill you have used during the exp gaining process and give you the chioce of being able to level it. But you still only get 1 point. Therefore if during 15 to 16 I used alot of BASH and a few WW then I would have the possibility of leveling either one,not both, no matter which one I used most. But if I didn't use any of my leap skill, I will not have the possibility of leveling it up further. Of course taking into consideration that you already have the skill. Lvl 0 Skill would always be open to unlock.
0
Whu? Oh, so what your saying is a system like D2 which (you just attack anyways) and up to one point then, you reach an experience level and get to choose any skill wether or not you have ever interacted with it is better?
And no, most systems that enable experience upon usage do not level up without you knowing it. Plus they could regulate it so that it would only strengthen upon reaching the next level, depending on how much you have used it.
IMHO this would be much more realistic. And it would actually imply that you have to use a certain skill in order to level it up, or a skill related to it in the case of a passive.
And for that fellow who mentioned that if you respec you have to go about killing small baddies all over again. ... In D2, there were no respec and you still had to start all over again and beat up small mosnters to relevel a new char, so in comparison.....
Plus it's so easy to fix, just make any skill point deficit level under the certain char level, exp faster through usage. Meaning if I was a level 80 Barb that just respecced, my skills would level faster ,up until the point where my cumulative of skill points got near my actual level.
Then tweak that and make it balanced and voila@!
0
Plus it is nearly the same as Oblivion. many folks once hinted that they should consider the advantages of such a system but most people just kinda laughed it off since there's alot of hate for that game from people who just didn't play it the way it was meant to be played.
I think it makes perfect sense to level a skill by constantly using it.
0
It just doesn't work. No matter how you explain it, no matter what the excuse for doing it is. It cannot happen this way. It is pure madness.
On the other hand I wouldn't mind seeing a wizard do such a thing as read a book. Now that would make sense. That would follow a certain logic.
Which leads me to my conclusion that it would be real badass (sorry for using this word twice in the same post but it was very fitting)
if they made a different way to level up skills for different characters.
Kind of like the same principle they used for different (energy sources) for each char.
I could picture the Barbarian getting a skill point up by killing meaner, greener monsters. Whirlwinding a Siege Assault Beast to death would sure as shit give you a level of WW.
The Wizard could read books he gets from harder and harder monsters. The Monk could perform different combinations (katas) on certain monsters and unlock points for his skills. The witchdoctor could perform rituals or voodooism on slain foes or some other class relevant shit to get his skill points.
This way it would make the characters feel more unique and really give them more depth than just a fucking nuke on legs.
And obviously characters would have to perform harder and harder tasks to reach those skill points every level. And limit the ammount they can get, e.g. (1 -2 skill points per level)
Your thoughts?
0
No idea is perfect, it just needs to be worked out.
Although your probably right, you still can't be sure so don't be so negative.
I think books are cool, but seriously, I doubt that if you needed a book for every level up it would be very appreciated. However, what if there were very (and I mean VERY) rare books that had a drop rate of a ZOD in D2; that would enable someone to level a skill past it's limit break. 20+ Maybe up by a few levels or to level 30.
With the help of this book you would be able to put skill points in your favorite skill to have it extra powerful. And this way, without the book, you wouldn't be able to pass skill level 20. Even from magical means such as items or gear that do + to skill. The gear would work but wouldn't be able to get your level past 20 unless you had read the book.
WW Mastery Book.
FireBall Mastery Book.
etc.
The ultimate reward for the MFer or simply the lucky guys.
0
U realize how much time they been, and still have to work on it....
Though, It doesn't necessarily mean that I am really thinking it could be done or not on Diablo3. It's Not like most of the stuff people talk about out here is taken seriously anyways.
Guess it's just to share what we believe might be cool ideas.
0
How about if we took that concept a little further by directly linking skills together. So basically this would mean that a player would choose his main skills and have them linked together to create new skill effects.
This would make nearly every skill usefull in the way that they would complement each other as well as create a way for the player to get more for his buck. It would only be done with none passive skills.
For example, if you mixed whirlwind with that smash skill it would create a new version which would spin the character and as soon as you released the button, your character would simultaneously perform a big finish to his WW by smashing the ground in front of him.
Kinda like the combo from God of War. Basically chaining different skills together for various effects. A zombie dog linked with wall of zombies would create a pet that attacked targets and upon a successful hit, zombies would come up and hold him in place to further enable the player to deal ranged damage to it.
Fire Bomb with Terror would create a bomb that replaced it's fire damage with a terror effect. Notably usefull for clearing out some potentially deadly monsters from a room without having to go in and suicide.
Those were just a few examples so to try to get the idea out there.
What u guys think?
0
Now the idea is very rough, since I haven't given much though to it. Instead I'm just going to write it out as it appears and let you guys sort out the details.
Since the beginning of time, (or RPG games) there have been skills. Skills are leveled up by clicking on them upon the gain of a new skill point.
Click* +1 to skill.....Skill reaches next level and thus goes up in strength with all kinds of predefined levels of usefulness.....
What if , upon reaching a new level, we would be given the choice to level a certain perspective of a skill instead of a skill as a whole. This would mean that instead of....
Click* +1 to Fireball = +damage, +radius, +fire, etc....
We first unlock the spell or skill (maybe with a quest/prerequisites or even class specific books) then every level we gain we are given skill points (not the same as D2 skill points) but simply points that would be used to directly level up certian aspects of skills.
(Reach a level) +20 Points
Click to customize whichever skill you need to customize...
For example, I'm a wizard, I like using a mix of teleport and disintegrate.
I use a tactic that heavily relies on placement and focus fire to eliminate large groups standing in a row with a direct beam.
So I could choose to level my tele speed, or distance and level up the disintegrate range in order to maximize the ammount of monsters I hit per cast.
I use this tactic for a few levels since I notice it's doing good, but then when I enter a new dungeon I notice that my spell power is lacking. So I then decide to spend the next point on damage instead of range.
All boosts could also be complemented with drawbacks. More range could mean less width of the beam. More damage could mean more mana usage per second. More width could mean a slower cast speed. etc etc. This way, it could prevent users from becoming too uber in a short span of time by simply leveling one skill. And it would make sure that we wouldn't end up maxing out a skill by level 10.
I wanna write some more but my wife says we gotta head out, so I'll let you guys talk some more about it.
0
Those might not be the exact words, but that's just cause I'm too lazy to find quotes and copy paste.:P Besides, you guys shouldn't have to be reminded all the time.
1
They would go to the ends of the earth just so Blizzard could give them a 3D version of the same game, D2. It's stupid and counter-progressive. Plus it just shows a general fear of failure and a lack of faith in the company that has given them games to play for the last 15 years.
PvM is awesome. But it gets old fast since monters never evolve or adapt to the player's skill level/ builds. Therefore when they start to optimize characters, the monster just get easier and easier.
PvP on the other hand is thrilling. Reminiscent to playing PvM on hardcore. Where the fear of death is ever present. Although dying in PvM hardcore results in loss of character (heartbraking, maybe) but a loss in PvP means a blow to your ego.(much more serious).
Noone likes to lose. Hence why the competition level is so high. PvP has always been an important part of D2 no matter which way you look at it. Even a PvM only player with half a brain would admit that alot of folks were doing it. Thus the reason why Blizzard is trying to improve on it and make it something more than a sideshow (as it was in D2).
They are trying to give it features, meaning, order. A properly developed ranking system would enable things such as internaitonal tournaments to take place and would make the Diablo world exponentially larger. Imagine th epossibilities, imainge the bragging rights of winning against all odds.
That's the kind of vision Blizzard has and the kind of spirit Diablo needs to remove itself from the ARPG (cheap story/clickfest) stigma that it has, and truly become a competitive/user friendly game it should of been a long time ago.
1
2. Candy-Grillz
3. Mr.T
4. Supa-Greazy-O-Crispy
5. Ballistic Kevlar Vest, aka (BulletProof)
6. Stone Skin (what....it's a good name)
0
That idea you got of rare quests is cool enough...
I mean, Items can be rare, so why not quests? Right...
Plus that just means you won't be going through all of them in a month's time.
And with quests being randomized, I think we should be getting a couple of hundred of them, no?
Not all of them being radically different, but some being other variants of the same quests.
(that's just me wishing out loud... o_O)
0
I believe that such thinking results in bad sequels.
I don't think they need to compare at all. Instead, simply take the
good points of the last game and improve on them. Like you said.
No matter if it is similar or "feels" the same as the previous game. So by saying Auras, people automatically assume there will be a repeat of D2. But what they are not thinking, is maybe they just used a familiar term to actually create something totally new, but possibily "based" on the old concept.
You can call it comparing games, I call it evolution. I think the later is more productive. :rolleyes:
In response to the second part, I don't think the designers are "trying so hard to remake Paladin Like Skills". They just wanted to make party friendly skills available to a character and maybe decided they should also be called Auras for the lack of better terms. :confused:
Which brings me back to the "you are comparing" , they are "evolving" idea.
That's like saying since they are "trying so hard to make sorceress like skills why don't they just call the Wizard, a Sorceress...."
You see where I'm going? Don't compare and say, well it feels similar so it should be the same.
Thus answering the last part, why dont they just retain the paladin?, cause it's a new game and they mostly agree on making new chars... It's not cause they have a few familiar concepts that they should give everything a Diablo2 Tag Name on it.
Although I agree fully, I do also realize that most hardcore players are even more aware of the existing problems and also need'nt be reminded constantly. Drawing conslusions and saying "OMG, people will abuse auras again" without even knowing what auras will look like in D3 is pretty pointless. But I do agree that for discussion sake some can state the obvious and pass it for an opinion.:P
This very "soft solution" was already put up, and already answered to..
If by sharing auras they decided to reduce power, then it would become a no brainer to NOT share it and instead boost the individual character (Monk), since Blizzard are making all of them EPIC anyways. Not like they will cry about not having a small boost from the "hypothetical" Monk Auras.
Consequently making sharing Auras totally redundant. That's all hypothetical though.
To my understanding, that's pretty much what Blizz meant. Equiping heavy armor that will respectfully be visually implemented as ornate clothing/armor to lighter characters. Not shiny plate mail. Which would be rediculous. I don't think however that we should worry much about it since it's been what Blizz has been doing althrough the Diablo Franchise.
(D1 - Rogue, and Mage could wear Full Plate that didn't look like FPM)
(D2 - Barb, Assassin, Sorceress)
They all had believable armors IMO.:thumbsup:
1
Come on a thread and reading a handfull of comments
doing nothing but comparing D3 to how D2 was. What's the point?
I played D2, yeah. The Pally did have auras. But when I stop and
really think about it, why the hell would he? Why should a knight
have auras? It doesn't make any more sense than saying a monk
has auras. They are both just as likely candidates for mistical
powers of the mind/Holy.
I just don't get how people come on and say "F*ck that, auras are only for pallys".
If it where the other way around and D2 had a monk, they would be saying the same thing about the Paladin.
________________
Bottom line is, Blizzard thinks auras "might" be a cool thing for D3. They trying to make it fit on the Monk.
I would bet my right nut that they know about the silly issues from the D2 era, in other words, they don't really need folks to come on saying how a Bowazon with Zeal+Might was OP. And I'm sure as shit that they are implementing something cool with Runes, keeping the aura factor balanced at the same time.
----PS: Totally agree with Luckmann on his last post, for once.----
It's a no breainer that unless soloing, everyone would go for a rune that made your aura apply to the team if it wasn't so by default.