DiabloFans

I appreciate the end you're shooting for... but I think the system you propose is fairly clunky. And in the end, it doesn't really put a hard cap on what you're trying to avoid, especially since gold is purchasable for cashola.

Anyways, if the devs thought the old system was too complicated, they'll never do that PLUS another systems at the same time.

1) The beta is not for playtesting or balancing. It seems to be solely to test their servers having everyone online at once.

2) The beta is one half of one Act, and can be played through in an hour.


If players are only playing for an hour (maybe 5 times, once for each class), yet they want as many online at once, then... they will hand out a massive number of beta keys. Probably they will start somewhere reasonable, and keep handing them out as they see what the servers can handle and more players have already played through enough.

More importantly, the will only need a very short beta. Even two weeks could work if all goes very well. Probably one month is reasonable. Go go release date!

Wow, I find this a very surprising thread. I loved torchlight. I think anyone who is disappointed is just expecting it to be something it never tried to be.

The art - I thought was great. The style stays the same from zone to zone, but the palette differs drastically, keeping it fresh. Compare to D2, where every Act has the same muted tones, which create a spooky ambiance, but also jade you to the difference between acts. D2 all felt the same. As for cartoony... yes, but with style. This was a much much smaller project than Diablo... it was created to be a game, not an epic, and for that I think the graphics are great.

The skills - I had great fun with two Destroyer builds. Besides the micro-managing buffs, each had a couple skills to use on mobs of enemies and another couple for big guys. The pace and scenery changes keep that fresh for quite some time. If it does get old to you, I think you're just looking for a bigger game. The Summoner Alchemist was also fun, and was a class heavily built on spells, as opposed to class skills, another well incorporated idea.

Mods - you can't blame the game for a lack of mods. The fact that they made it so easy, and even gave us a modding program speaks so much. Compare to D3...

Pet AI was horrible.


So, Torchlight could have been more, but for the scope of game they tried to make, it is perfect.

Quote from xRand0mH3rox

The idea behind the recent rune ideas that Jay talked about in the interview gave me the idea to solve the problems most of us have with this new skill system. It is ok to swap the skills without any consequences, but the skills could be made like runes.
If we insert a skill into a slot, it is unmastered, so it can be changed any time, like in the current concept. But every slot would have a mastering option. 30-60 is 30 levels, divided by 5 is 6. So the characters would get one mastering points every 5 level after level 30, which means 6 points total.
Every slot would have 3 master level, like advanced, expert and master.
If someone starts to master a skill, that would be locked into the slot. Mastering would give affixes semi-connected to the skill, like increasing critical-chance or resource pool maybe.

So basically it would keep the skill changing option to experiment any time, but if someone wants to really go deep into customization and maxing out the potential of a character, mastering a skill would be a choice to go as well, and it would make the skill build locked.

I really like this idea, I think it is similar to mine above, where I proposed a 4-total-skill-point system, whereas yours is six, and slightly more flexible. I hope the devs read this and consider refining something along these lines and seeing how it plays.

Two proposals:

A) Bring back 'skill points', but give one major and two minor per character. So each player has six skills... one major buffed, two minor buffed, and three regular. This adds further customization on top of the six skills one makes their build from. I think it can greatly add to the complexity of the game, while avoiding the pitfalls that made skill points unfun.

A lock-in system for old characters. Once you've found a skill set you love, you can lock it in, announcing to the world that that is who your character is.

Thoughts on the removal of skill points:

1) They now CAN make a 1/2 skill system not viable, by balancing the game to need more than 1/2 skills. If Whirlwind can kill every monster on screen, every time, then it will have a cooldown or resource cost to make that impossible. You will need to fill that gap with another skill, either an attack or a resource regen. Then, this can be repeated until you need at least 3 skills to have no downtime, etc. The only way you would be able to get away with only using 1/2 skills is then if those skills are to weak to clear the screen of monsters by themselves.

2) The skill point system in D2 was dumb for the reasons Mr. Wilson states... having to save points while leveling is just against the way one feels a game should be played. As others point out, the synergies made it worse. Anyways, who wants to play a game for 3 hours, and have cast the same spell 30,000 times, and nothing else?

3) I think what players will miss is the sense of identity that comes with choosing a certain build. Who knows if the barbarian you see is really into swinging axes, or just testing it out before swapping skills? When every player of a certain class can wake up tomorrow and respec the same way, that makes one feel not unique.

4) Similarly, players seem to be worried about the current degree of customizability. In D2, even two characters with the same skills could (theoretically at least) have a different point spread, and therefore a different emphasis on different skills. It seems like what Mr. Wilson was saying was that they couldn't build this degree of complication into D3 without it being only skin deep... it would seem like there were a lot of choices, but really there were only a couple ways to do it 'right'. Yet the idea of two characters choosing the same 6 skills, but playing them slightly different, is interesting. One character might use skill A as a main attack, and B situationally, while another uses B regularly, and A only occasionally.

5) Replayability vs. time. The nice thing about the system laid out for D3 is the ability to play around and test a skill/build. Once you find one you consider optimal for you, bam, you're an axe barb. But tomorrow, you could be a sword barb, and that makes the original choice less meaningful since there was no cost in making it. A system with locked-in builds helps replayability, and is good for those who can/do play a lot. A system with respecs is good for those who shouldn't have to play for 10 hours just to try out swords instead of axes. I feel for both groups.

Thanks for reading. Edit: inadvertent smiley, lolz.