Not sure if this has been posted already but here, enjoy:
http://www.videogamer.com/videos/diablo_iii_gamescom_2011.html
- CherubDown
- Registered User
-
Member for 13 years, 10 months, and 22 days
Last active Thu, Jul, 13 2023 08:16:54 - GoogleCherubDown on Google+
- 33 Followers
- 2,243 Total Posts
- 200 Thanks
-
1
Dalren posted a message on Inferno difficulty confirmed!We posted at almost the exact same time -.-.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
3
Hicksology posted a message on Inferno difficulty confirmed!Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
1
Winged posted a message on How Blizzard got 3 things wrong with D3Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from masternic351) it's more fun to play with 8 players and have more tuned down special effects
It's actually a far bigger issue than just visuals, the problem is much more about maintaining a good PvE difficulty level. In Diablo 2 with 8 players on screen there was absolutely no challenging parts of the game due to this same balancing issue. Scaling monster HP and stats to suit 8 players would mean that the second a player strayed away from the group, they'd be completely screwed. This is a terrible game play mechanic.
Through thousands of hours on combined in house in-game testing Blizzard has found the best number to maintain a very reliable scalable difficulty level to be at 4 players. You can rest assured they tested 5, 6, 7 and likely at one time very early on 8 players. They chose the 4 player cap for a valid reason, so simply maintain true in-game challenges.
To touch on visuals, they want you to feel powerful. The heroes in Diablo 3 are supposed to be even more powerful than the heroes of the past 2 game lore wise. The development teams wants this to show through in every aspect of your character. Because the cap is set at 4 due mostly to the difficulty issues, this allows the team to beef up the visuals of your skills to match the limits of the 4 player cap visually. -
5
RokkitSerjun posted a message on online only?When D2 was released over a decade ago, one of it's cutting edge features was the client-server online protection. At the time of release this was top-shelf security and it took quite some time before any real cracks appeared in it. However, with enough time and effort everything can be cracked and now we have to current botfest of D2.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Now they wish to make D3 as secure as possible at release. If to get a high level of security so that bots/hackers/dupers/asswipes don't ruin my gaming experience I don't care if they force you to breath into a tube to get the program started. If it can keep my playing experience fun for as long as possible I say do it.
Whats even more ironic/moronic is that I bet 90% of the people who played D2 did so online or at best played offline only when forced to. Lets get real, in todays broadbanded world will being connected to play really be a problem? The only time I'm not connected is during a power outage, which tends to cause a serious degrade in gaming experience by itself. Get real and find something realistic to bitch about...
-
6
Zhuge posted a message on The Ultimate List of Active and Passive Skillsmy hands hurt.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
finally updated the wiki with this new content and i think we should start consolidating all information.
http://www.diablowik...9#Active_Skills
http://www.diablowik...#Passive_Skills
http://www.diablowik...arbarian_Skills
http://www.diablowik...r#Active_Skills
http://www.diablowik...#Passive_Skills
http://www.diablowik...n_Hunter_Skills
http://www.diablowik...k#Active_Skills
http://www.diablowik...#Passive_Skills
http://www.diablowik...ate:Monk_Skills
http://www.diablowik...r#Active_Skills
http://www.diablowik...#Passive_Skills
http://www.diablowik...h_Doctor_Skills
http://www.diablowik...d#Active_Skills
http://www.diablowik...#Passive_Skills
http://www.diablowik...e:Wizard_Skills
-
3
Peace posted a message on Killing the Unicorn Queen: A Tale of Tumult and TriumphThe story has been retracted by me, the author. I came upon it a year later from a google search, and i didn't feel like it was up to par. If you want to read it, privately message me and I'll send you an updated version!Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
5
Winged posted a message on PvP in Diablo 3Posted in: News & AnnouncementsPvP in Diablo 3
Since the first announcement of the PvP interview segment with Jay, and from Sixen's Press Event article. Unfortunately the Beta will be lacking the PvP portion of the game all together. Seeing as this information won't be materialized in game for us until release, following the PvP development is the closest we can get to playing it.
Changes/Additions
In the PvP model at Blizzcon, when you died you were out until the round ended, only able to view the battle from a ghost form which is incapable of interacting with the battle. This caused some gameplay issues seeing as it would always end up being a "last man standing" situation, which Blizzard didn't feel suited their casual approach to PvP. As of now the PvP system supports a team death match style of spawning, where when you die you have X seconds until you respawn into battle. This system bases the winning team off total kills between all players on the team. As team death matches tend to go, the round ends when either team hits the kill cap, or the time limit runs out. Through internal testing they found that players generally enjoyed the PvP experience more seeing as they felt like death didn't remove them from the game. Blizzard also found that this gave players a chance to figure out counters to the opposing team's strategy, which often made for epic come backs.
With the announcement of the real currency auction house came some concerns about how this will effect the PvP system. The fear is as with Diablo 2's third party vendors, a player willing to spend the money can simply buy their way to victory. Although Blizzard won't be creating, or selling items themselves the ability to buy items, and thus power still remains via purchasing from other players through the AH. In Blizzard's eyes this is all the more reason to avoid a hyper competitive PvP environment.
Official Blizzard Quote:
-Still same arena environment, still kind of feels the same, but when you die, you stay out for a few seconds and then you come back. It bases more on time limit and kill count, which we actually found was a lot more approachable and a lot more fun.
This power purchasing situation is unavoidable, players will find a way to buy items no matter what. The concept of a separate Arena for non-currency traded items only has been brought up among PvP enthusiasts. Problem is this would segregate the PvP community, which is something Blizzard stands firmly against.
Due to the integrated match-making system even if someone spent the money on a leveled character, and all the greatest gear, they would be matched with players with similar character capability. So chances are buying all perfect end game gear for PvP will just pit you against very high caliber players, not some noobs you can smash.
Moving along to PvP player caps, the Blizzcon PvP model only supported 2v2, and 3v3; limiting the player cap to 6. The reasoning behind this low number is not due to technical limitations, but rather clean gameplay, and low visual pollution; same as the 4 player cap in PvE. Many players bring up how Diablo 2 had an 8 player cap. Diablo 3 isn't Diablo 2, both player and monster skills are more visually flashy in D3. Through internal testing they've found the sweet spot for PvP player caps sits between 6 and 8 (3v3 or 4v4). The current 3v3 PvP limitation isn't finalized, as Blizzard is currently testing 4v4 matches in the Arena.
The infamous Hardcore PvP mode has yet to be discussed thoroughly, likely because it seems to be constantly undergoing changes. On the topic of HC Arena deaths, it turns out Jay's ability to get a crowd cheering isn't enough to sell the rest of the development team his views on Hardcore mode. At Blizzcon while talking about the HC Arena, his response to death in the mode was as follows:
Official Blizzard Quote:
We’re actually playing around with the max being 4 per team, which is 8 players total, but that’s still 4 per party. By the way, that’s not confirmed, we’re just playing around with it. Ideally, we’d love for parties in PvP to be 4 players.
While the crowd seemed to be all for it at the time, since then a lot of controversy has been stirring in the community expressing how there is a good portion of HC players that don't like this concept. These HC players feel they should be able to participate in PvP with their HC character without risking so much. Blizzard has yet to finalize their plans for the PvP HC mode, but never the less Jay had something to say about it at the recent Beta meeting.
Official Blizzard Quote:
You're gonna die, cause it's hardcore mode. So if you don't want to die don't go into the Arena.
Official Blizzard Quote:
The PvP strike team that focuses on that area, they are pretty nervous about it. Their basic feeling is that if that is what happens, then hardcore characters just won’t PvP. But then there was hardcore dueling in D2 so we may change that. We may allow hardcore PvP players to play without dying. That being said, I still want a way for hardcore players to duel even if not at ship. I am going to push for a way. Even if its basically just a place where you can go in the world where you are flagged for PvP. Even if it is that simple, there is a community, even if it’s a small community that I want to support. Those fuckers are crazy. Part of me is like aww you crazy bastards.
Non-competitive PvP Environment Blizzard has long made games based on close competition. Ranging from the calculated multitasking of StarCraft, to the skill casting hot key tracking ways of World of Warcraft. In both franchises the games have been balanced around PvP; Diablo 3 will be different. Blizzard has chosen to persistently steer clear of heated competition while developing Diablo 3. Determine to base the game around PvE, it seems PvP comes secondary when making development decisions.
Skills in PvP will not be reworked from the ground up, but will instead be tweaked via under-the-hood changes. Things such as stun, freeze, or snare effects will be tuned down for PvP separate from PvE. A main reason for Blizzard not completely overhauling each skill for PvP separately is that it would cause your character to play very differently in PvP than in PvE, thus causing a disconnection of the gametypes. Even further detailing this concept, Force asked Jay Wilson about this during their interview over at Blizzard headquarters.
During this interview Sixen asked Jay if the community were to try to turn PvP into an e-sport, would Blizzard stop them in any way? The simple answer is no, they would not. Jay goes on to explain how they wouldn't stop them, but they sure won't support them. Blizzard doesn't plan on extensively balancing PvP, if a player base wishes to form a e-sport like group it seems they'll have to deal with the imbalances that will come with the PvP game.
Official Blizzard Quote:
What we have is within the data of the skill, we have these things called snows that are little containments of data. You can open up the magic missile snow and see everything that magic missile does. We have this other column that is for PvP and it can take any of the attributes for the regular skill and change it. We primarily use it to change how long a stun lasts or… We don’t have any diminishing returns and we are hoping not to. Cooldowns and damage could change but we try not to mess with those because they are really tricky. Crowd control durations; those are the big things that tend to change that are game breaking.
Many players who understand these concepts ask the question, why can't they just balance PvP completely separately from PvE? Or add features that a lot of the PvP player base wants. The way the development team is approaching this is black and white, either they market PvP as an e-sport and add all the e-sport features, or they don't add any of those features in at all. Seeing as they have limited time and money, choices have to be made on where they can put their effort into.
Official Blizzard Quote:
-when people say “BARB IS TOTALLY OP!!!” we’re going to be like “yeah… he probably is.”
On the topic of PvP ranking, currently there is no true ranking system. Along with this, they do not plan to track stats for the purpose of displaying them, but instead to form a fair and accurate match-making system. The reasoning for not visually tracking stats is no one likes losses on their record, some players are so irked by them, they'll recycle accounts to improve their stats, sometimes spending large amounts of money in the process.
Official Blizzard Quote:
You can’t give the people an e-sport set up and then say it’s not an e-sport. If you are going to commit to that, then you have to commit to it. It’s not an e-sport, we are not going to do that high of level of feature set. It’s also one of those things where, from the outside it looks like we have endless time and budget but the truth is we don’t. The truth is we work our butts off to get the game out and we make choices and adding features like that to make it an e-sport when it’s not a goal for us, when we could be spending those dollars making the PvP game better or the PvE game better, we are going to spend the money there.
Instead of a stat based ranking system, players will have a PvP "level" that will be viewable right on your character banner. These levels are progressed through by simply playing the PvP game mode. Winning will progress you faster through the levels, but it is possible to reach the same levels no matter how much you lose. Jay touches on this during an interview with Force. There will also be no win/loss ratio stats being tracked. Your PvP level will represent how much time you've played in the Arena, not at all being based on any sort of ratios.
Rewards, and Wishlist Features.
While understanding Blizzard's firm stance on a casual PvP mode one might ask, what features will PvP be lacking?
One idea currently endangered is the spectator mode. In StarCraft2 this feature is necessary considering the e-sport aspect of the game. In Diablo 3 the feature still has a niche, and surely would be entertaining but due to the time constraints the development team is under, unnecessary features are put on the back burner.
Another common request regarding PvP is the addition of secondary game types such as CTF, VIP, or a type of "Horde Mode". While Jay didn't completely shoot down these ideas, he explained how at the moment their focus is to polish the current PvP model.
Official Blizzard Quote:
It is actually on a list, but it’s pretty low down on the list because there are a lot of things that would be cooler to do and without it being an e-sport… replay is kind of an e-sport feature.
These features may not be lost forever though, as the development team sees the fun in them and hopes to add them in sometime after release. Secondary game types can flourish if done properly, SC2 being an excellent example of this with their very popular tower defense games just as one example. Diablo 3 certainly has the capability to support a massive array of secondary game types for when PvE and PvP just aren't enough, the question is if or when they will be implemented.
Official Blizzard Quote:
-We know we are going to have some balance issues, and it’s a lot easier to control if we’re not balancing for different kinds of modes, so right now we’re just focused on the one.
Another wishlist feature is a wagering system, where a player could bet gold, or possibly real currency on a PvP match. This feature would have to go hand and hand with the spectator feature. It was not denied to be possible, but since it does suit an e-sport like setup, there will surely be resistance to it's implementing.
Official Blizzard Quote:
We have definitely talked about some other modes. Not at ship but who knows about the future. I really like the idea of a mode that involves monsters and players of some kind. We have played around with modes like that but the biggest issue was that they didn’t feel like Diablo. I think that was just the design we had but there is a way to do it that feels like Diablo.
As for rewards is seems there will be many achievements to complete in PvP, which could provide some type of reward. There are also titles, which will likely be similar to the Diablo 2 title system.
Official Blizzard Quote:
Right now there is a whole array of PvP oriented achievements and titles and part of the banner, the crest of the banner, is dedicated just for PvP. So as you get to higher and higher ranks, it levels that up.
- PvP Crest (Top of the banner): Where your PvP, "Level" will be showcased on your banner.
- Achievement Tally Marker: Your completed achievements will be showcased on either side of your banner.
- Highest Completed Difficulty Status: Highest difficulty completion is shown.
- Hardcore Identifier: Do you not fear death?
- Party Member Listing: Each player in your party is represented by their unique banner flag.
- Quick Join Listing: Located under the banner, you'll be able to join other players also looking for matches.
- "Social" Button: Presumably all of your friends will be listed, even while playing other Blizzard games.
- Profile (Helm): Where you view your in-game possessions and character details.
- Achievements (Shield): View you achievement progress.
- Auction House (Gavel): Links directly to the AH.
- Drop Listing: (Bottom left) This drop listing hasn't been detailed, though from its location it could have something to do with the chat box.
- Chat Box : Can't have Diablo without one!
- General Menu Listing:
All in all Blizzard has taken a different approach to PvP in Diablo 3. Instead of being the end game jewel it was for Diablo 2, it is now simply another way to test your character with friends. Through extensive PvE development, we can only hope there is a lasting PvE endgame being stowed away beyond our knowledge, since PvP isn't looking to be developed to fill in endgame content. Although PvP is not the main focus of the development team, it is sure to acquire a fan base all its own.
Be sure to check out Sixen's Give Me Options or Give Me DEATH! article where you can vote on your preferred type of auction house, and listen to DiabloCast Episode 20.
Get pumped for the Beta by reading Magistrate's More Beta Buildup article.
Don't forget to update your Beta profile! More details in ScyberDragon's Important Beta Profile Update article.
-
2
Enty posted a message on Chinese Screenshot LeaksPosted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from Jackzor
That log in screen makes no sense. I thought that was Ureh (based on when it was shown in the cinematic trailer) and didn't they say Ureh wasn't in the game? I guess its just a different place then. Maybe Caeldum.
This is Ureh on the screen is reversed to the other side. Caldeum is a town in open space and has more green roofs, Ureh is a lost city on the side of a cliff, which is what is depicted in the screen, It seems they may have added it after all, Either that or they just wanted us to get some nice viewing before we started up the game. -
8
snowhammer posted a message on The August 1st RevealThe August 1st RevealPosted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Sixen's News Post - The Press Event
Diablo Cast XX - Force, Sixen and Tempest Discuss all the August 1st Info
The Auction House
The Press Kit Screen Shots of the Auction House
PhrozenDragon's News Post Explaining the Auction House
Force's Auction House Announcemnet Video
Diablo Cast Live 8/3 - Good Discusion About the Auction House
Official Blizzard Overview of the Auction House
Official Blizzard FAQ on the Auction House
Notable Blizzard Quotes on the Auction House
Q u o t e:
but it also has the potential to damage the game economy and overall experience for the many thousands of others who play World of Warcraft for fun
Q u o t e:
Official Blizzard Quote:
We still think that's true for a MMO in which thousands of players co-mingle in a persistent world and vie for supremacy in eSport competitions or 'world first' boss kills in raids. Neither of these are true though for a co-op action RPG.
The worst that could happen is you open your game up to the public, someone jumps in wearing some awesome gear, and you don't know if he found those items himself. But that'd be the case whether we offered an official way to buy items from other players or not.
we feel that players can find ample equipment and money for their characters within the game through their own adventuring and questing.
Q u o t e:
Official Blizzard Quote:
The same is not true for Diablo in which all items are randomized in both affixes and drop chances from all enemies. We know that trading is necessary in Diablo games to build a solid character as you could play forever and still never see a specific item you're after.
Yes - but why oh why the 180?
I always thought that Blizzard games were the last bastion of 'no ingame advantage can be bought for real money'.
Bashiok, I am a big fan of yours and generally agree with what you say. But I cannot express my dislike for this new development strongly enough.
Q u o t e:
Official Blizzard Quote:
Bottom line is people are going to buy those in-game advantages whether we want them to or not. We have a subscription-based game in World of Warcraft and try as we might we still struggle to keep pace with those looking to turn a profit. Why not bring that in-house, make it secure, make it guaranteed, and provide a safe way for players to sell to other players?
This is specifically only a decent idea in our minds for Diablo III because an in-game advantage doesn't mean you steal a world first, or up your arena rating, or edge out in a competition. Diablo III is a co-op game. If you're buying power it's to jump into games and help your buddies kill demons faster, and guess what, they get more drops in less time. In our eyes that's not buying an advantage as a selfish measure, it's really just kicking more ass in co-op games with your friends. It's apples and oranges, if you will, to something like an in-game advantage in a game like World of Warcraft.
Okay...I see your point Bashy. But don't you see why so many people are worried?
The introduction of real money into the system means people wanting top tier stuff will pay a fair chunk of RL money.
When the first guy pays 500$ for an item, things start to inflate. Suddenly, casual players or those not willing to buy with their real money are locked out of it. And the inflation will continue.
If there was some way to strictly limit how much an item can be sold for and curb this effect...then maybe. But I can predict that this is going to go all kinds of pear shaped.
Official Blizzard Quote:
We may have upper limits. We may have minimums. Listing fees are flat so it's not in our best interest to let it get away from us. That said, it's supply and demand, and we want this to be a market run by the players. Every rule we impose could upset that and suddenly it's not players setting market values, but Blizzard deciding how it goes. I still think some limits are likely, though.
I have no doubt that the gold auction house will by-far outweigh the real money auction house in scope and amount of items available. The good thing here is that being able to sell gold for real money will naturally keep the gold auction house economy in-check a bit. Not a lot, but it should be helpful.
Q u o t e:
I love how Bashiok comes in here and cherrypicks some random post in which he'll have an answer to, but doesn't really address the RMAH uproar that has divided the community.
Official Blizzard Quote:
The only way to address it would be to say it won't be in the game, or will be sequestered off to separate servers. Neither of which are going to happen. I've given a lot of reasons why we think it's going to be a fun addition to the game, but I'm not going to be able to suddenly change peoples minds. The best I can do is try to correct misinformation, but the facts seems to be known by most, and there are some healthy discussions going on.
And yes, I'm going to cherry pick posts which I have answers to.
It'd be kind of funny though to instead pick posts I don't have answers to.
Skill System Changes / No More Skill Points
Force and Sixen - First Reaction
Force's Video - Jay Wilson explains the skill change
Magistrate's News Post on the Removal of Skill Points
Notable Blizzard Quotes on the Removal of Skill Points
Q u o t e:
After a lot of thought about all the new systems I'm pretty happy with them, but I have one issue....
From what I've read it seems as though you unlock all of your skill / passive slots by level 30 so what do you gain leveling from there to 60 besides auto-stats and new loot?
It seems likes there is a whole zone where nothing really happens to your character.
Am I missing something here?
Q u o t e:
Official Blizzard Quote:
You'll have access to all the systems by the end of Normal, but that doesn't mean you're going to scratch the surface with them.
You'll be leveling your artisans, teaching them to make new items, finding higher quality runes, finding higher quality gems, combining gems, finding loot in Nightmare that doesn't drop in Normal, finding loot in Hell that doesn't drop in Nightmare, etc. and really continuing to max out use of each of the available power adjustments.
Plus the need to really tighten up builds, get a good mix of skills, pick the right passives to support them, and gear out in specific directions becomes more and more important as the game gets tougher.
I don't think having to become a better player and invest more in all the game systems is a "deadzone", it's where the game gets challenging.
How dumb do you think the average Diablo 3 player will be? I'm posting here on the internet; my fingers are magically finding the keys and forming words which turn into coherent sentences. Did I just blow past the expectations you have set for me?
Q u o t e:
Official Blizzard Quote:
So you figured out it's better to pump all your points into one or two skills. What a smart gamer you are.
How long do you think it would have taken even bad players to look up on a website that it's the best way to play a game where skills have to scale with more points?
We've been playing the game, we know what skill points were causing, and it was not interesting and unique builds. It was not meaningful customization. It was maxing out a couple skills, and that's it. It was Diablo II. What we have now actually forces people to make interesting choices, to craft interesting builds based on very strict limitations.
One common mistake people are making is thinking all the class skills are straight damaging attack skills, and they pick six of those, and they're on their way. There's no variety because you just pick the most powerful six, and you're done. You can do that, but you're either going to straight up die, run out of resources and waste time dying or running away, or you're going to have to figure out some godly resource regen stacking gear setup. One of those sounds fun, and challenging, which makes even crazy builds like using six straight damage skills potentially viable if you can game it right.
The current iteration of the skill system will work just fine. My only concern is the limiteless ability to change skills (either out in the field, or in town) with no cost. I know you said you are taking a "wait and see" approach.
What I am wondering is if you, personally, can say how you feel while out in the world being able to change skills on the fly. Do you come upon a particularly nasty group that this other skill would just be perfect for, so you hang back, grab that skill, then destroy the group?
Maybe my concern with this is unfounded, but I just like the idea of a character build having more permanence.. so a "Whirlwind/Ancient Spear Barbarian" actually means something, instead of what you feel like playing that day. I understand the need to experiment early.. but can't there be a comprimise in that late game build changing could be more restrictive?
Official Blizzard Quote:
I think that someone choosing to hang back and switch up their build for a specific pack is totally possible, but experience shows that it's not something most players want to spend the time to do. And that's more about build identity than min/maxing.
It's far more lucrative and time effective to create a viable build that can deal with a variety of situations, and we also find that players want to create and stick with an identity even if there's the ability to freely swap. It's generally a matter of finding the way you want to play, and fine tuning. And really we're not talking about skills so specific in function that it's going to be that enticing. You're pretty much either killing enemies, or protecting yourself. There's a ton of variety within offense and defense, but I don't think it's so ideal as to make someone stop and switch out their entire build.
Like I said players inherently want to stick with a specific character identity. You're far more likely to see a player sticking with a build and working to become better at it than constantly swapping around. That's not a rule, it's player psychology so there's going to be a wide range of variables, but it's what we have found to be true not only for Diablo III, but a lot of the games out there with similar free-swapping of builds.
Official Blizzard Quote:
I realize there’s a lot of information spread around, I’m hoping to bring some of it to a single post and hopefully get our point across and reassure you that the changes we’re making are for the betterment of character customization options, and ultimately your long-term enjoyment of the game.
So, why did we get rid of skill points?
(Note: this is a supplementary min/max explanation. There are lots of other reasons which have been touched on in the past such as how players approach our game, supporting the idea of builds, observing how players behaved in internal testing, etc. This is just further explanation that I think will resonate with some of you.)
In Diablo III, we really want to improve the combat depth. Part of having combat depth involves having skills that are useful in different situations. In Diablo II players often used a single skill to deal with almost all situations: Blessed Hammer, Frozen Orb and Bone Spirit to name a few. Players invest 20 points into a single skill and use it as much as possible. The only reason a player would swap away from their primary spam skill is due to monster resistances/immunities. If a monster was immune to your primary spam skill, you’d either skip the encounter completely or fall back on a second skill. Neither of these answers provides the player with much combat depth.
To support combat depth, skills need to have different roles. Here is a very simple example:
•Magic Missile deals 15 damage to a single enemy
•Arcane Orb deals area of effect damage for 10 damage each
With these two skills we’re beginning to develop some combat depth for the player. Use Magic Missile when you’re facing one enemy, use Arcane Orb when you’re facing multiple enemies. But you may also want to use Magic Missile if one enemy is a “high priority target” in a group, and you want it to die quickly. In this simplified example players can still defeat a horde of enemies by casting Magic Missile multiple times, or they could defeat a single large enemy by casting Arcane Orb multiple times, but that wouldn’t be as efficient as a player who uses the right skill for the right situation.
Ok so that basic layout of combat depth out of the way!
With skill point spending your skills get better as you invest points into them. The problem is that this destroys combat depth. If after pumping a bunch of points into Magic Missile it now deals 70 damage to a single enemy, assuming my enemies have any reasonable health, then Magic Missile becomes a better choice than Arcane Orb even in group situations. If after pumping a bunch of points into Arcane Orb it now deals 45 damage, then it deals more damage than Magic Missile to single targets. Now rather than using the right skill for the right situation, I’m using the skill I’ve put all my points into. Skill point spending has eroded away combat depth.
Why did we go from 7 skill choices to 6?
(Note: again, this is a supplementary explanation. We’ve gone over some of the other reasons elsewhere, but this is specifically targeted at those of you here who feel strongly that 7 means there would be more build diversity than 6)
Diablo III emphasizes build customization. We feel that 6 skill choices actually creates more build diversity than 7.
Why? Well for any given set of options, the greatest number of combinations exists when the number of choices you can make is close to half the number of options you have. Some of you may remember a high school math problem like this: There are 12 differently colored marbles in a bag. How many different color combinations can you get by choosing X marbles? Well as it turns out the solution for various values of X are:
•1 marble: 12 different color combinations
•2 marbles: 66
•3 marbles: 220
•4 marbles: 495
•5 marbles: 792
•6 marbles: 924
•7 marbles: 792
•8 marbles: 495
•9 marbles: 220
•10 marbles: 66
•11 marbles: 12
•12 marbles: 1 (there’s only 1 way to choose 12 marbles from the 12 in the bag)
The greatest number of possible combinations happens when you are choosing 6 from a possible 12.
You may be asking what 12 has to do with anything as classes all have over 20 skills available to them...
This is true in theory, but in practice players tend to (and really should) pick up skills to fill different roles so they can be effective. Categories such as single target, area of effect, auto-targeting, debuff, defensive, group buff, escape, crowd control, 2-minute ubers, pet skills, etc. etc. Players generally take at most two (and often one) skill to fill any particular role. For example, the Wizard has Ice Armor, Storm Armor and Energy Armor, but I don’t think anyone is going to take all three (though maybe somebody will take that as a challenge and prove me wrong), most players will choose one Wizard Armor spell (note that this can change dramatically with some rune effects). If we look at each class, depending on how you count, you get anywhere from 8-12 different types of skills. So we err on the high side in our category estimate (12) and that means 6 is a pretty good number to maximize build variety.
It's important to note that we’re not just talking about you and your friend having Wizards with slightly different skills, we’re talking about you and your friend having 6 skills that are different in functionally significant ways.
Closing remark! When we pull math out like this I’m sure somebody will point out that if our only objective was to maximize build combinations we’d have allowed people to also choose 6, 7 or 8 passives rather than just 3. So I’ll counter by saying maximizing build combinations is not our only objective. We also want our system to have aesthetic flavor, to be simple to understand, and to have the passives in particular feel impactful. We have many different goals that we take into account when making any design decision. In the case of active skills, we felt the increase in variety was one of many good reasons to go from 7 to 6.
So how many skill combinations are there now?
Well taking into account 6 active skills, all the rune combinations, and 3 passives we currently expect each class to have roughly 2,285,814,795,264 different build combinations. That’s not taking into account skill types for ‘ideal’ builds, but that’s always been a big part of the fun of experimenting (and longevity for Diablo II) - finding a build that shouldn’t work, and making it.
Always Online???
Gameplanet Interview - Jay Wilson Talks About Always Online
Possible Rune System Changes
Force's Video - Jay Wilson on Possible Rune Changes
Kickin_It's News Post on the Possible Rune Changes
Notable Blizzard Quotes on the Possilbe Rune Changes
Q u o t e:
Official Blizzard Quote:
Personally, I love it, and hope it finds a way in.
I'm not so sure about rolling to see which rune effect you get (it could still work), but I *love* the idea of random affixes. That you could have a end-rank rune for the skill you want, with the effect you want, but you still don't have ideal stats on it. That just makes the min/max item hunt that much cooler, and makes runes more important than... "Oh, I found another Crimson rune. Great. /salvage"
Yeah, but it makes it harder for me to see everything that could potentially be on my rune. I won't know what "perfect" is without digging into the game and even then, what are the chances of me getting the rune I want.
I don't like the random aspect of this part, I feel like randomizing my skills isn't a great way to go :(.
Q u o t e:
Official Blizzard Quote:
Pretty unlikely you won't know what's available with an auction house at your finger tips.
And if we're just talking about affixes, we're talking about min/maxing. You're going to know what affixes you want because you're already pretty deep into your build.
I don't expect a new character to pick up a rune, roll affixes, and then throw it away because "ew it has attack instead of defense". Probably not going to care much early on.
Ya, I suppose that's definitely true. But you also have to take into account that it'll be randomizing the type of rune as well, correct? So I only have a 20% chance of getting the rune I want, regardless of whatever affix is added.
Maybe if each rune type dropped instead of "unattuned" runes, then I'd at least be able to get the rune I want and hope I get a good affix on it.
Q u o t e:
Official Blizzard Quote:
Well, like I said I don't know if that part of it will work out... I just want the randomized affixes. Makes runes so much more compelling as an item.
I'm confused as to why this was put into place... I have the idea, but it seemed like the 'faced' rune system was better, since we got to know what it was.
The 'defaced' system feels kinda sketchy, and it would seem that some people might not understand that
New player: "oh hey a rank 1 rune"
*socket*
New Player: "neat. does this now"
*kills stuff, finds another rune*
New Player: "oh rank 2? I'll upgrade it then"
*sockets rank 2 rune into previously socketed skill*
New Player: "Hey, how come it's not doing the same thing? now it's doing something totally different? Is it the rank? What is this "multi-shot" thing? It gave me bonuses? Now this rank 2 rune gives a different bonus, and does a different effect?"
*goes into general global channel*
New Player: "HOW DO RUNES WORK!?!?! Someone help! I've found all these runes but it keeps changing my skill around!"
Official Blizzard Quote:
That sounds about right. Well, like he said it's still just hallway discussions at this point.
B.net Features / Banners / Class Crests / Interviews
Force's Video - Battle.net Features Overview
Gametrailers Rob Pardo Interview - Battle.net Features
Doomscream's Post - Comprehenesive List of Blizzard Interviews / QAs
CherubDown-DiabloDaily's Breakdown of the Press Kit Photos
Press Kit Screen Shots - Banners, Battle.net Features
Force's Video - Class Crests
Press Kit Screen Shots - Class Crests
Near Full List of All Skills and Passives
Doomscream's Post - The Ultimate List of Passive and Active Skills - With Pictures
PvP / Arena Changes
Force's Video - Jay Wilson Explains Diablo 3's Direction for PvP
Winged's News Post - PvP in Diablo 3 - Lots of Blue Quotes
10 Character Limit?
Notable Blizzard Quote on the 10 Character Limit
Q u o t e:
Basically you dont ever have to level a new character.
Official Blizzard Quote:
You knew that was the case with respecs. Funny enough, even with respecs, leveling characters is fun. There are plenty of games with respecs where people will level many, many characters of the same class, just for the fun of it. And without anything really 'tied' to a character, it's easy enough to dump all items to the shared stash, delete the character, and start a new one.
I will say though it's one area where we're definitely open to expanding, it just seemed like a decent number to go with for now.
Beta Info
Magistrate's Beta News Post - The Purpose of the Beta
ScyberDragon's News Post - UPDATE YOUR BETA PROFILE
Force's Video - Beta Gameplay
Force's Video - Beta Screenshots
Blizzard's Official Overview of the Beta
Blizzard's Official FAQ about the Beta
Let me know if I have missed somthing or if you feel somthing should be added / taken away in the comments below. Thank you!
-Added DiabloDaily's breakdown of the Battle.net screenshots
-Added Doomscream's comprehensive list of interviews
-Added Doomscream's Ultimate list of Skills and Passives / with pictures
-Added Diablo Cast XX - Discussion of all the topics
-Added Winged's news post on PvP in Diablo 3
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
2
Official Blizzard Quote:
Well, followers are essentially a flavor bonus to those playing through normal the first time by themselves. It provides some story elements, but more importantly it gets the idea in their head of playing with another person. You come across each of them pretty quickly in Act 1, and then they help you throughout the rest of the game if you'd like. They aren't required to beat the game on Normal, even if you're playing by yourself. Feel free to leave them behind if you like. But they are pretty awesome.
They're also tuned so that they become very weak starting in Nightmare, and then are completely unusable in Hell. Even if you're playing alone, you will probably not be using Followers past Normal - - you can try but they're going to just be one-shot back to back. They're there as a bit of flavor, to help get people into the mindset of co-op if they're a bit reluctant, and... that's about it. They won't be usable at end-game, and they'll never replace the abilities and power that another player can bring.
It provides some story elements. That's right. The companion doesn't add any more story than is already provided. Instead, the character adds color to the situation.
Official Blizzard Quote:
Followers will not stay alive easily past Normal, and if they're not alive you aren't going to be getting their bonuses. I'm sure people will try to game this, and ideally they will fail. If not we will ensure followers are not part of the end-game MF equation. They are not intended to be, and we will take whatever steps are necessary to ensure they cannot be.
They're also tuned so that they become very weak starting in Nightmare, and then are completely unusable in Hell.
They are not intended to be [used outside of normal], and we will take whatever steps are necessary to ensure they cannot be. In other words, this is JUST A FLAVOR MECHANIC FOR NORMAL DIFFICULTY.
1
1
ScyberDragon asked Bashiok if they had plans on how and when they are going to announce these remaining systems.
Official Blizzard Quote:
@ScyberDragon Yes. Very specifically.
I think they know exactly when they're going to start beta.
3
This is just speculation.
Blizzard would not be doing any "vague or hopeful speculation" when talking to investors, they are serious about their estimations. Furthermore, Blizzard does not want to release any game after Christmas. Doing so would be bad business for any company.
For once in your life people, believe what blizzard says, ffs.
2
It's not a moral boost. It's a conference call to investors so it's as accurate as they can possibly predict.
Edit: I'd also like to note that releasing any game AFTER Christmas (aka Q1) rarely ever happens.