Secret Leaked Transcript of Jay Wilson Consultant Interview

Fun post.

What I feel mostly trolled by:
- The huge RNG factor where some low-iiq maps drops like 4-5 high level maps, and 140+ iiq maps drop nothing aside from a single 72 map. Or killing that insanely hard mapboss with sick damage mods and gods knows what, and drops nothing. And then that simple&exploitable boss from underground river drops some...
- Cards. ~97/100 cards = utter garbage (no exaggeration required). Most gambler cards turn into lover/emperor cards and the high iiq maps drop tons of crap cards all over the place.
- Corrupted areas not spawning in maps.
- Look at the way we trade...


Map droprates are actually improved imo. I see less 68-69 maps and the way we roll new maps now saves me a TON of currency and I no longer really need chaos orbs. I just hate the RNG.

But the lifeleech needed a nerf, maybe they overdid it a bit but it was way to op pre 2.0.

The L-coil is no longer really required in softcore because the new passive trees imo are stronger and the right jewels can save us some passives as well. It's just, the jewel droprate is so high, I see several uniq jewels dropping a day.

The lowlife nerf was sad though. Not that I ever had the money to make one.

The eternal orb, I don't mind. I don't have 2000+ exalts to craft some gggg item and like the other 99.99% of the people, I will never see a mirror.

I don't care about the insane dps from monsters in Act4. I just skip act4 in merciless, no point in running it aside from skill quest. But I agree for hardcore normal/cruel.

"

I'm amazed at the rapid degeneration of entertainment standards around here.

-16 million

This is bloody hilarious coming from you of ALL people. You've been on probation more than an inner city graffiti artist. From forum troll to white knight, how's that working out for you champ?

this act4 is realy bad. Stroy telling D3 style at its worst. LAst boss:" i show u the real nightmare!". This shit more likely for kindergarden shitbags. Im done with this game.

+1
Somewhere in the ocean somebody who survived an air crash is screaming "I'm sorry Wilson"

best post ever :) you deserve medal for it

"

mugwumpshasnoliver wrote:

"

What's to "address" or "listen to" when 95% of the "feedback" is "OMG THSI GAEM IS 2 HARD AND U GUYS ARE SHIT AND I WANT MY MONEY BACK"?

I actually find the reverse. People that complains often have valid points and great arguments to back up their statements, while people like you keeps on replying things like "it's fine"/"get good" and some fallacious arguments based on personal experience.

If you actually research how surveys work, their strengths, their weaknesses, you are both half right and half wrong. (All claims below supported by real peer-reviewed research.)

• Ask an average person if something is good or bad (and only ask them that) and you tend to get nonbiased feedback. It's usually nothing more than a 1-10 rating, but it's usually valid.
• Ask your average person why something is good or bad and the reason you'll get back is usually drivel. Furthermore, you're likely to corrupt ratings - people will report their actual likes or dislikes based on their theories, not how they actually feel.[li]

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

mugwumpshasnoliver wrote:

I actually find the reverse. People that complains often have valid points and great arguments to back up their statements, while people like you keeps on replying things like "it's fine"/"get good" and some fallacious arguments based on personal experience.

If you actually research how surveys work, their strengths, their weaknesses, you are both half right and half wrong. (All claims below supported by real peer-reviewed research.)

• Ask an average person if something is good or bad (and only ask them that) and you tend to get nonbiased feedback. It's usually nothing more than a 1-10 rating, but it's usually valid.
• Ask your average person why something is good or bad and the reason you'll get back is usually drivel. Furthermore, you're likely to corrupt ratings - people will report their actual likes or dislikes based on their theories, not how they actually feel.[li]

I mean, everyone on this forum clearly doesn't enjoy the game in its current state, otherwise they'd be playing it.
So that would say a big "bad" on the first thing.

I wrote this earlier post in a hurry, and wanted to add something.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

mugwumpshasnoliver wrote:

"

What's to "address" or "listen to" when 95% of the "feedback" is "OMG THSI GAEM IS 2 HARD AND U GUYS ARE SHIT AND I WANT MY MONEY BACK"?

I actually find the reverse. People that complains often have valid points and great arguments to back up their statements, while people like you keeps on replying things like "it's fine"/"get good" and some fallacious arguments based on personal experience.

If you actually research how surveys work, their strengths, their weaknesses, you are both half right and half wrong. (All claims below supported by real peer-reviewed research.)

• Ask an average person if something is good or bad (and only ask them that) and you tend to get nonbiased feedback. It's usually nothing more than a 1-10 rating, but it's usually valid.
• Ask your average person why something is good or bad and the reason you'll get back is usually drivel. Furthermore, you're likely to corrupt ratings - people will report their actual likes or dislikes based on their theories, not how they actually feel.

• Being able to explain why something is actually good or bad usually requires some degree of expertise (in this case, as a game developer, not as a player).

Therefore, reasonable conclusions:

• If there is a huge public outcry against a particular portion of the game, it is a very solid bet that something is actually wrong.
• It is also a very solid bet that the various "solutions" suggested during said outcry are far from ideal. People know something's wrong, but they don't really know why.
• The ideal solution could be something very different from what people would normally think of in terms of solutions. No solution is obvious, and you don't give solutioncraft the proper respect if you believe otherwise.
• If you are trying to "white knight" by saying nothing is actually wrong, chances are that you are twisting facts to suit theories, not theories to suit facts.
• If you are trying to "white knight" by saying the various suggestions being proposed are not good ones, chances are you are correct. The answer to "should things revert to how they were in 1.3?" is almost certainly "no," because there is probably a solution better than 1.3.

This last point is key. GGG had to try changing things up in order to continually improve the system. Sometimes they will err, and make things worse. But if they didn't try changes, things would never get better. (Although having less wipes during the recent closed beta may have allowed them to test map changes more thoroughly before introducing them properly to production...)

If you are trying to get inside the mind of a professional game developer, chances are that you haven't the foggiest on how to actually do game design yourself, and as much as you rag on him, even the disasteriffic Jay Wilson made, makes, and will make better games than you have, do, or ever will, even if money were no object for you. Previous sentence doesn't apply to GGG devs; they've already have made better.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I wrote this earlier post in a hurry, and wanted to add something.

• Being able to explain why something is actually good or bad usually requires some degree of expertise (in this case, as a game developer, not as a player).

Therefore, reasonable conclusions:

• If there is a huge public outcry against a particular portion of the game, it is a very solid bet that something is actually wrong.
• It is also a very solid bet that the various "solutions" suggested during said outcry are far from ideal. People know something's wrong, but they don't really know why.
• The ideal solution could be something very different from what people would normally think of in terms of solutions. No solution is obvious, and you don't give solutioncraft the proper respect if you believe otherwise.
• If you are trying to "white knight" by saying nothing is actually wrong, chances are that you are twisting facts to suit theories, not theories to suit facts.
• If you are trying to "white knight" by saying the various suggestions being proposed are not good ones, chances are you are correct. The answer to "should things revert to how they were in 1.3?" is almost certainly "no," because there is probably a solution better than 1.3.

This last point is key. GGG had to try changing things up in order to continually improve the system. Sometimes they will err, and make things worse. But if they didn't try changes, things would never get better. (Although having less wipes during the recent closed beta may have allowed them to test map changes more thoroughly before introducing them properly to production...)

If you are trying to get inside the mind of a professional game developer, chances are that you haven't the foggiest on how to actually do game design yourself, and as much as you rag on him, even the disasteriffic Jay Wilson made, makes, and will make better games than you have, do, or ever will, even if money were no object for you. Previous sentence doesn't apply to GGG devs; they've already have made better.

Bump and +1, I completely agree. That's why I personally try to just point out the issues I think are there without giving it a solution myself, I understand how hard it is to give a solution, but the problem should at the very least get acknowledged.