I haven't watched the summary, just the entire thing itself, and I can tell you that I was pretty relieved about how Wyatt answered things.
1) He made it crystal clear that PvE > PvP and, although he was initially a huge advocate for PvP in D3, he admitted that the new legendaries and design decisions in RoS made it even more difficult to include PvP. So, you might have to wait significantly until PvP arrives.
2) He said that he's pretty happy with BoA and Archon and Jaetch also said that over time people will get used to it. In my opinion it's fine. I think it'd be nice if gold was tradeable, because I'm sure some of my friends will completely forget to bring even 10m into the expansion and they probably can't re-roll a lot of stuff because they'll be constantly broke... but other than that, BoA works only in favor for the original Diablo game experience.
3) Wyatt made HUGE disclaimers that the ideas he pitched were some of a few hundred ideas they discussed internally in brainstorming. Read again: just one out of hundreds of ideas. Nowhere did he say that would be something they'd implement. And seriously, this entire "RoS has no endgame" discussion is absolute nonsense. D3 is going back to its core with RoS and it's working out quite well, the most recent balancing changes made bounties and rifts enjoyable and rewarding. And in the long run we will see something like seasons, ladders, events for sure.
Yeah, if you want a game with free trading, PvP, and a focus on competition, don't wait for the next expansion. The development of RoS highlighted that this is not at all what anyone at Blizzard has in mind for Diablo, so you might just wanna move on and not build up anticipation towards features that will never come to the extent you would like to see them.
-
- daisychopper
- Registered User
-
Member for 10 years, 7 months, and 28 days
Last active Fri, Oct, 16 2015 14:26:41
- 0 Followers
- 302 Total Posts
- 73 Thanks
-
Feb 18, 20143
Bagstone posted a message on Developer Playtest with Wyatt Cheng (VOD)Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion -
Feb 11, 20142
shaggy posted a message on Did something happen recently?.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Not sidestepping. The Disgaea series is completely fucking irrelevant to this discussion.Quote from Maka
Again, nice job sidestepping the Disgaea series (and games that basically copied its formula). How many titles do they have, now, 10? More? I guess having an entire series of games whose playerbase expects to grind them for years doesn't really support your argument.
It took them almost NINE YEARS (across multiple games) to sell 1.7 million units. Diablo 1, in half the time, sold almost 1 million more units. The audience is night-and-day different, and that's exactly what I've been trying to get across to you. You can make a niche game if you're OK with 400k sales. You can cater to very specific expectations if you're only ever expecting 100k players.
But, dating back to Brevik and the Schaefers, that's never been the goal. They said in an interview that their goal was basically to reverse the niche that RPGs had become due to their overly-complex and numbers-oriented gameplay and, instead, substitute it with an experience where your focus is primarily killing things. They wanted to open the RPG genre back up to the masses. They didn't want Diablo 1, 2, or any other Diablo title, to be some little secluded nook for 10,000 players.
So to not understand their audience leads to statements like how you don't care what the average gamer believes. You may not give two shits about the average gamer, but Blizzard does, and they do because Brevik and the Schaefers proved that by NOT catering to the RPG crowd they could create a majorly-successful game in D1 and even moreso in its sequel. You can't create a successful game like that by ignoring what the average gamer wants and to try to say that the average person who picked up Skyrim EXPECTED 12+ months of playtime is completely delusional. It might be your expectation, but it's not the expectation of the average gamer.
And, frankly, if you don't like that, the ship sailed 20+ years ago when Brevik first showed his idea for Diablo to the Schaefers and then they pitched it to the boys at Blizzard. So, unless you want to take Dave Brevik on about how wrong he was to try to mainstream a genre that was shrinking, you're just going to have to live with the fact that the original designers of the Diablo series set out specifically NOT to make a game like Disgaea. This is not a new design philosophy, it's something that the progenitors established that clearly has carried over and has even influenced other games that Blizzard has created.
Every time someone says a Blizzard product is "dumbed down" that comes back to exactly why Diablo was so ridiculously successful.
http://www.edge-online.com/features/the-making-ofdiablo/
Give it a good read. Try to understand that Disgaea represents exactly what Brevik was trying NOT to create with Diablo 1 - specifically that it's complex for the sake of being complex which leads directly to it having a niche audience. It's INACCESSIBLE to most gamers. So, frankly, using Disgaea as an example only serves to disprove what you're trying to prove.
The most striking quote to me came from Erik:
"We noticed that anyone could pretty much play, even people’s moms."
Remember that was THEIR design philosophy. This isn't some new thing. This isn't Jay Wilson's invention. It's not Josh Mosquera's invention. It's not some corporate pitch that Bobby Kotick gives them every three months. This is how the people who the D3 haters have touted as the demigods of ARPGs approached D1 and D2. They viewed niched RPGs as a bad thing that needed an alternative. They viewed Diablo as the ANSWER to the PROBLEMS that games, like Disgaea, created.
So, with that in mind, exactly what does it matter that Disgaea fans EXPECT to play those games for 12+ months? Blizzard has never been trying to cater to that mindset because it's very much different from that of the mainstream gamer. So why should they start now? -
Feb 10, 2014
3
shaggy posted a message on Did something happen recently?.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
It has nothing to do with your personal opinion or what I think of it.Quote from Maka
Why exactly should I care about, or take responsibility for, what other people think? He asked a question, I answered. You didn't like the answer? It went against what you think? Well....tough sh*t.
None of our INDIVIDUAL opinions matter. Our COLLECTIVE opinions do matter.
If you genuinely think that the average gamer picked up D2, D3, Skyrim, or ANY OTHER GAME IN THE HISTORY OF VIDEO GAMES and *expected* that game to entertain them for a year, or more, then you're completely delusional. Period.
Whether you like it or not, whether I like it or not, what the AVERAGE GAMER expects matters and not what you, or I, individually expect. Therefore what YOU expected from D2 is completely irrelevant because it simply doesn't mesh with what the average gamer expects. Until the landscape changes, there isn't jack shit you can do about it.
If you're going to sit here and expect *anyone* to believe that you said to yourself, before purchasing Skyrim, "If this game doesn't last 12+ months then it's terrible" well... you'll have an easier time getting anyone with a functioning brain to believe that I can shoot rainbows out of my ass on Valentine's Day. You may have HOPED it would last you a long time, but the difference between a WISH and an EXPECTATION is severe. So to say that people EXPECT D2, D3, Skyrim, etc. to last 12 months, or longer, is just completely irrational. No one with any semblance of perspective EXPECTS a game to last 12+ months.
You can EXPECT anything you like. That's your prerogative. But if you really think your expectations for some $50 or $60 game to give you 1000+ hours of entertainment over 12+ months falls in line with what the average gamer expects of a title.... you really need to meet some real gamers.
Developers make games for the entire market, not just for you. If you cannot differentiate your personal feelings from what the general gaming audience wants then you're going to be constantly disappointed... like you clearly are in this case. But that's not the developers fault. It's yours for having completely-irrational expectations of games. You can't possibly expect someone to take you seriously when you said that you EXPECTED Skyrim to last you 12+ months... you know that, right? That'd be like throwing a forum shitfit because Skyward Sword only lasted you 75 hours. The response would be "no duh" not "oh, we're so sorry, next time we make a game we'll design it specifically to last at least 15 years for you, bub." -
Feb 10, 2014
2
shaggy posted a message on Did something happen recently?.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
You *EXPECTED* those games to have 12+ months worth of content? I don't think so.Quote from Maka
Yeah, I can think of a few. Diablo 2, Titan's Quest, Torchlight, Elder Scrolls games (with mods), the Disgaea series......that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure I can come up with more if I think about it for a while. None of these operated under the philosophy of "max level or die".
Most people I knew who picked up Skyrim, for example, played it for about 100-200 hours then moved on. There was absolutely no expectation that they'd be playing the game two years post-release. When I bought D2 I don't think I actually *EXPECTED* to play it for five years. I can't be sure because it was a damn long time ago but I sincerely doubt I picked up the box and said to myself "If I don't play this game for AT LEAST A YEAR then it's terrible." I know when I purchased Titan Quest it surely wasn't under the expectation that it HAD to last 12+ months otherwise it was a failure.
Hell, I just recently gave RIFT a shot... and RIFT is an MMORPG... and I don't recall going into it with the assumption that I had to play the game for a year. The point being anyone who thinks ANY game should last them that long needs to take some fucking medication because they are seriously delusional.
I mean, seriously, I played WoW for 8-ish years, and I played EQ for around 5 years. I never EXPECTED either of those games (and they are/were subscription-based MMORPGs) to entertain me for that long. For people to EXPECT non-subscription games to entertain them for 12+ months is lunacy.
EDIT
eman was also talking about the playerbase, not you as an individual. It would be hard to argue that the average gamer holds the expectation that any title should entertain them for a year, or more, because that's simply nonsensical. It just doesn't make any kind of sense. If you think that MOST people purchased any of those titles with the expectation that they would be playing them 12+ months later, you're really projecting some extreme expectations on people who almost certainly never gave a thought to it and probably couldn't care either way. -
Feb 8, 2014
4
shaggy posted a message on On Enchanting Legacy Gear (Repost)Level 60 gear, quite simply, has very different (and in many cases, completely broken) rules for rolling stats.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
There has to be some kind of separation between gloves that can, essentially, roll 6 primary stats, and other gloves that are capped at 3 or 4 primary stats otherwise the ones that have 6 primary stats OBVIOUSLY become better than 95%+ of the 3 or 4 primary stat gloves. It's just common sense.
This isn't simply a case of "just buff level 70 shit" - it's not exactly genius to suggest MORE stat inflation, by the way - it's more of a case of "unless we do something, a handful of level 60 stuff is going to be super-desireable because we've completely changed HOW items are generated." SOME level 60 items basically have a massive loophole in how they roll as compared to their loot 2.0 counterparts. Something has to be done whether we like it or not.
It would be ABSURD for people to be rocking BiS-type items day 1 in RoS because they didn't do anything. This is a clear example of doing something > doing nothing, even if the "something" is controversial.
EDIT
I mean, honestly, do you people really want MORE instances of Legacy Nat's? I'd think it's much better for the game if they avoid stuff like that. Strangely enough, Legacy Nat's never got nerfed because people use the "I spent so much time attaining this so you can't nerf it!" logic... even though most of us knew the set bonus would still be OP. When did people start to expect that a level 60 item would have a shot at being useable at level 70? I sure as hell never found a level 50 item and expected it to compete with level 60 items... because that seems patently shortsighted and ignorant. -
Feb 6, 20141
Slayerviper posted a message on Incentive to play coop in ROSPosted in: Diablo III General DiscussionI guess to have fun with friends... you know something that people seem to forget about and it's all about efficiency.
-
Jan 30, 2014
2
shaggy posted a message on Good topic on character developmentPosted in: Diablo III General DiscussionI feel like this is your thesis, and, unfortunately I couldn't disagree more because you seem to be insinuating that unless a choice is set-in-stone it has no meaning.
I can go back to the eye doctor and choose a new pair of frames at any time. Does that mean my choice in glasses is immaterial and worthless? Of course not.
I can file for divorce. Does that mean I don't take my choice in spouse seriously? Hell no.
I can go get a new job. Does that mean that I just took ANYTHING that came along? Definitely not.
Arguably the majority of the important decisions in our life are NOT set-in-stone, yet they are still very important and not inconsequential either. Furthermore, by the "it's only fun if I can't revert it" logic, any game in the history of gaming with a save file that you could save before an action and reload after an action if the outcome was undesirable is.... a horrible game that no one should enjoy. Yet games like Final Fantasy 7 (and Diablo 1) where people did exactly that were popular because (shocker) people just don't like being 100% locked down by their choices.
I mean, ultimately, why do you think D2 eventually added respecs? Why do you think WoW (whose talent trees were obviously an evolution of the D2 skill trees) has had talent respecs since forever?
Like Catalept said... an ARPG isn't a pure RPG in that sense. Some ARPGs slide more towards the RPG side of things, but even those really aren't true D&D-style RPGs. In fact, I read an interview where Dave Brevik specifically said that their goal with D1 was to make a game that was combat-oriented and fast-paced as compared to a traditional RPG. -
Jan 23, 20141
Garm posted a message on PTR T-4 to T-6 no blue, yellow and legendaries?Posted in: Diablo III General Discussionmay you are right bro, honestly i also look over other places a practical response to my frustration, it seems that you need to have a lot of damage on your character, in order of kill a single mob in one strike, that makes more sense to me, the fast you kill and the big mob areas are in a single wave the most chance you have to get items ... i made a feedback research in the old posts of the blizzard forums, as for the streamers comments, maybe its because some of us get to feel the sanation that they are pro gamers at least thats the idea they bend on us. so maybe i over reacted a little but not everything its bad, still love the game, still im a fan and thinking in the best possitive way ill try get fun at the time the game comes out.. cheers!
-
Jan 21, 20141
IgnatiusReilly posted a message on A little Heart to Heart about RoS...Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionPosts like these only appeal to those who are already inclined to hate the game. I could write 100 pages on how the font they chose has ruined the game irreversibly, and it'd get parroted around by the gilted ex-lovers of Diablo.
The Tias (who made a far better post) and Droth have made the following points:
1. Drop rates are too low.
2. Enemy damage too high.
3. Enemies have too many HP.
4. CC effects need to be nerfed.
5. Rifts need to be more rewarding.
Hardly game breaking when read in a format that doesn't evoke mass hysteria.
And taken as whole, all this says is, "You'll have to play the game for a while before you find all the best items and faceroll content." Oh no!!! And if it's really really upsetting you that you might have to play the game longer than 20 hours before you have everything, then perhaps the ARPG genre just isn't for you. Because no matter which of these games you play, whether it's Torchlight, PoE, or even Diablo 2, if you want to have the best of the best items, you're going to have to play the game for a little while.
-
Jan 21, 20141
miles_dryden posted a message on BOA's purpose is bullshitPosted in: Diablo III General DiscussionNot going to be a popular post, but I'll say it anyway: I see a lot of people complaining that they won't be able to boost their friends as easily so they can play together. It seems to me that if you just want to play together, it shouldn't matter what difficulty you're on, so if you need to go back down to their level that shouldn't be a problem. If you want to get them to point that they can play on the higher difficulties with you, then, frankly, that SHOULD be harder to do. I don't think it's that big of a problem that people need to work to get up to the higher tiers of the game. Of course you should be allowed to help them get there, but that doesn't mean you should be able to just give them a bunch of free gear to get them there instantly.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1
I did! I thought that was obvious based on how my response accurately addresses both your original message and your reply to overneathe, but I can spoon-feed you if necessary.
You see, you said:
Which I understand to mean that in your subjective experience, you are not able to "successfully complete the event." Then you continue:
Here, you're saying they should be outright nerfed, you're just couching it terms of possible vs. impossible instead of easier vs. harder. But the bottom line is that you feel they're too hard relative to the rest of the content on a given difficutly, and you want them made easier. Which is fine; but I don't agree.
So my response was:
And I stand by it. I don't think the event is imbalanced, I think you're not prepared for it. And I think the complaint is even less valid because as overneathe said:
What did I miss?
1
1
Yeah, white/grey will D/E into common junk (or whatever it's called). I was annoyed about it at first, but the drop rate is so much lower now I don't mind hoovering everything up. You get a good amount, too - I've seen stuff D/E into 8 or 9 common junks.
I fucking love Odeg. He is such a jerk, it's like just killing him is reward enough in itself I don't even need a drop. He is the kind of villain who just makes you go, "This motherfucker's gon' die" under your breath, even if you're normally a pretty relaxed dude.
2
Anyway, relax. If you're overwhelmed by all the skill changes, they actually have a very well implemented system to help you learn the skills one at a time - it's called leveling. Just start a new character and play him up. If you're 100+ paragon and have gems, you can easily handle Expert, if not Master. It's a lot of fun, and it'll go pretty quickly.
Also,
Leave out the vague threats of quitting. Nobody cares if you stop playing.
2
1
2
1
1
Hey guys, I was just checking out /r/diablo and someone posted this; it looks like there's a random merchant that sells Legendary and Set plans sometimes. Here's the original post:
Original link: http://www.reddit.com/r/Diablo/comments/1wjpoo/meet_dane_bright_he_sells_set_and_legendary_plans/
People are saying he'll be beta-only, so people can test out more legendaries and sets, but that seems like a really strange way to go about doing so.
3
I completely disagree with him.
it doesn't follow that just because my skill choices are temporary, I am exactly like every other character of the same class. I have the *potential* to be like *any* other character of my class, but not all at once, and that would not change if my skill choices were not temporary. The only difference there is that I can exercise that potential without starting an entirely new character.
I think it's false to say that because of that flexibility, Diablo 3 characters are meaningless. Rather, their "meaning" just comes from the class itself rather than the sub-classes we're used to from Diablo 2. It's those labels, like "Whirlwind Barbarian" and "Blizzard Sorceress" that are meaningless, because the defining characteristic - chosen skills - are not static anymore. But it's not a loss, it's a trade - the label "Barbarian" or "Wizard" is more meaningful in Diablo 3 for the same reason. And I think that's a big improvement, because you're getting a whole lot more meaning.
And you're not losing any "flavor." You just have the option of changing it. If I deck out my Wizard with frost skills, he has that frosty flavor and the fact that I don't have to make a new character to use different skills doesn't diminish that flavor (as long as I'm using those skills, obviously).
Ultimately, I just think it's just stupid thematically to have locked-in skill choices. I mean seriously, my hero is supposed to come from obscurity to conquer a great evil and does it all using the same skill? Better in my mind that over the course of his journey, he develops a variety of awesome fighting styles that he is able to choose from as he goes from battle to battle. How is that not a more desirable narrative? Instead, I should prefer a character who has one solution to every problem, and as zero adaptability?
Imagine a barbarian from D2 meeting a barbarian from D3. The D2 barbarian has specialized in whirlwind and axes (i.e. the only real choices he gets to make) and then has the usual 1-point wonders. He can only kill anything by WW'ing it, and if he finds a badass sword he can't comprehend how to use it as effectively as an axe, to the point where it's actually not even worth using for him. The D3 barbarian knows the whirlwind fighting style, but he is not defined by it. He knows many fighting styles, and can combine them however he deems fit. He knows the desert has flying insects that are hard to catch, so he employs a ranged attack or adopts a highly mobile fighting style. He's tracked down a Lesser Evil and readies powerful single-target techniques.He can use almost any weapon as effectively as any other, and can make instant use of whatever he finds.
The D2 barbarian's girlfriend would dump him on the spot for the D3 barbarian, no contest.