Add more features similiar to Diablo 3?

"

ewolow wrote:

"

Magnus1520 wrote:

I think what I love most about this game is it seems to revolve around "What is Diablo doing and how can we do it better." And for the most part PoE does virtually everything better.

However, there are a few features they are still missing but I feel like it will be implemented over time.

Firstly there is one that's been requests for a while now, a force move option, I would really like this like Diablo 3.

A sort option for Stash tabs. This is pretty much just a QoL thing but since we already have a search function, it's not really a big deal.

An armory type system like Diablo 3. After the recent update with D3, I have immediately begun loving the armory system. It's amazing and I feel like this game could really benefit from it as well.

Endless upgrades and inflatable enemies. This is more like a leaderboards thing or a feeling of achievement thing but not everyone will like this which is understandable. Personally I love it because it makes me feel like I am constantly improving, even if it's only a little. However, I really am not suggesting this, just putting it out there, because I also like PoE's style of endgame play. Dont misunderstand though, I am both against and with this, if it cant be done right, dont bother, but if it can be done well, then please do! But even then I dont know. I guess this one really depends on the general player's preference so I will let others decide on this one!

Honestly the one I really want is the force move option, I feel like everything Path of Exile does they just do well for this genre. I also feel like this game is the best of its genre as well.

I don't know if you are familiar with the history of this game and how many of the early beta adopters came to find it.

Please allow me to explain to help you understand the pushback and comments you may receive on this subject.

When D3 came out you had a huge HUGE Diablo 2/LOD follwing anticipating that game. When they finally got it, they found that the veneer was Diablo, the guts were WoW. People waited a long time and patiently sat through tons of hype.

During the bans/mutes/deletes in the D3 forums that raged in the days/weeks that followed release, word of another game that was more like D2 LOD than D3 was got out. That game was Path of Exile.

August 2012 was filled with memes about "using orb of regret on D3 purchase", Jay Wilson (D3 Dev) vs Chris Wilson (POE Dev), Jay Wilson was a meme for at least a year.

Then there was the whole "Real money auction house" which auction house requests still come up from time to time.

The vitriol against D3 was thick and palpable. The reaction to what that game did with the franchise by fans was swift and relentless.

It may be a fun game to play, but pretty much nothing about it says Diablo other than the name.

There are multiple aspects that made D2 fun. The random "I got something awesome" drop to the soj (Stone of Jordan) ring economy based on gambling gold.

Even the ears that dropped when you would pvp.

Another aspect was twinking alts. Being able to put really good items on a lower end character and be above the curve while leveling until you flatten out at higher levels.

Then there was the crafting and rune words.

D3 is way too linear in it's progression, you couldn't really twink by trading if you wanted to because now everything is class specific and BOP/BOD.

These are all WOW mechanics and POE players really want to avoid them.

So when one reads a subject line: Make this game more like D3. The immediate reaction is: F*ck no.

This is not to mean that you don't have good ideas. Item sorting is nice, but really not needed and inflatable power curve is primarily handled by maps and map modifiers.

In my opinion of course :)

Your judgement about D2 is very clouded and based on fanboy favor, rather than realistic feedback from the community.

When D2 hit, the whole franchise took a big hit, as nothing was like in D1, which is still considered the best ARPG up to date. Blizzard took away from us the freedom in learning every skill in the game, in becoming whatever we wanted, independently from our choice of Avatar.

All levels were totally random, vendors actually offered great loot for tons of gold and if we wanted to learn a spell, then we had to find a book for it.


D2, removed all of this, now we were forced in three talent tree´s, which often resulted in 3 viable endgame builds, per class. Everyone was playing that frozen orb or firewall sorceress, all the barbs were WW or Amok and so on.

Items later, became redundant, as RW´s were everything you needed and the dark story from D1, was tuned down to fit a brighter, mainstream market.

D3 tried to bring a lot back from old D1, rares became a thing again, we could literally combine all skills of a class and make our chars as we wanted and not like a predefined tree demanded and the restrictions to boss runs from D2, were also lifted.

Overall, D3 made a lot right, at least if you were a fan of D1, but unfortunately did they kill too many features, after D2 fanboys protested.

Anyways, I didn´t want to lecture you, but we need to be honest at least and D2, was nothing of what you claim it was.


@ topic

The biggest feature of D3 that I want to see, is the chance to acquire stash space, by fulfilling tasks in the game. We have the challenge system, so why not reward us with an additional stash if we master 16 challenges? It´s not super easy, but also not impossible.

"

grepman wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

Sorting one tab would probably have little impact in the database, imho, I think that the database part is irrelevant here and would not require much processing.

But we cannot be sure of that, only GGG can.

it depends on design implementation. we already know that they use a regular (and free) rdbms (postgre) so the writes arent cheap.

it's a matter of how item storage of item locations and stashtabs is designed, what indexes they have on the database and so on

we do know that from how stash is loaded in game and through api, that it caches a certain amount of pages

so really, when we search, we dont actually issue queries to db, we search within the pulled cached entries. and likewise, when we put something in the stash, we 1)put items one-by-one 2)put it in locations that are already cached.

in order to sort something, there needs to be an algorithm that does sorting accordingly and then flushes all these updated locations to db. generally, it shouldnt be a problem, but who knows- implementations are different and I can see some scenarios where a design not intended for sorting would be really bad for such a procedure

As a full-time DBA, I did not expect to read so much database lingo while at home browsing the PoE forums....
Also did not this runs on Postgre, thanks for sharing. I always wonder what the innards of the games I play look like!

"

grepman wrote:

we do have *some* information, from which some things can be inferred.

either way, a real-time sort would be a lot more expensive than you dumping two inventories full of stuff into your stash item-by-item in any design implementation.

No, not necessarily.
They might be able to do the whole sorting before updating it without any communication with the database, if it has been cached.
Which would make the whole thing essentially the same as just dumping an inventory into the stash, database-communication wise.

But, we lack information.

Your "would be a lot more expensive" is something that you actually do not know, you just don't.
Just knowing that it runs on postgres has little impact in our case ( not to say none ).

Chris recently posted about how sorting removes the feel of "weight" from an item. He feels that the clunkiness of sorting through your inventory gives a sense of inertia to items in the game and that auto-sorting, while convenient, lowers the overall feel of the game.

"

Ygidua wrote:

Your judgement about D2 is very clouded and based on fanboy favor, rather than realistic feedback from the community.

When D2 hit, the whole franchise took a big hit, as nothing was like in D1, which is still considered the best ARPG up to date. Blizzard took away from us the freedom in learning every skill in the game, in becoming whatever we wanted, independently from our choice of Avatar.

All levels were totally random, vendors actually offered great loot for tons of gold and if we wanted to learn a spell, then we had to find a book for it.


D2, removed all of this, now we were forced in three talent tree´s, which often resulted in 3 viable endgame builds, per class. Everyone was playing that frozen orb or firewall sorceress, all the barbs were WW or Amok and so on.

Items later, became redundant, as RW´s were everything you needed and the dark story from D1, was tuned down to fit a brighter, mainstream market.

D3 tried to bring a lot back from old D1, rares became a thing again, we could literally combine all skills of a class and make our chars as we wanted and not like a predefined tree demanded and the restrictions to boss runs from D2, were also lifted.

Overall, D3 made a lot right, at least if you were a fan of D1, but unfortunately did they kill too many features, after D2 fanboys protested.

Anyways, I didn´t want to lecture you, but we need to be honest at least and D2, was nothing of what you claim it was.

You disagree with me, my judgement is not clouded. I played D1,D2, and LOD for years. Obviously we vary on what we felt made it fun. I rarely played a sorc and either played javazon or bowzon.

In my post I specifically spoke to LOD fans and yes there was some griping, but D1 achieved no where near the popularity that LOD did.

It's interesting to see that you suggest I have a fanboy view of the game while you get into specifics of mechanics you liked and disliked between the two versions.

None of this has to do with my primary point however. That there was a lot of pushback from the D2 community when D3 came out, so much so, the lead developer was either fired or quit, is beyond debate.

"

Ygidua wrote:

@ topic

The biggest feature of D3 that I want to see, is the chance to acquire stash space, by fulfilling tasks in the game. We have the challenge system, so why not reward us with an additional stash if we master 16 challenges? It´s not super easy, but also not impossible.

Stash tabs should be bought in order to support the game. Other superficial rewards for challenges already exist, stash tabs are too meaningful and the bread and butter of GGG income. They are simply too valuable to give away.

"

You disagree with me, my judgement is not clouded. I played D1,D2, and LOD for years. Obviously we vary on what we felt made it fun. I rarely played a sorc and either played javazon or bowzon.

Honestly, D2 had builds while D1 didn't :P. You were limited in Stat Choices, which was essentially all you did for leveling. And while D1 might be better in terms of innovation than D2, LoD blew both away. LoD essentially was D2 how it should have been from the start. It rounded up the game in the right way.

"

Items later, became redundant, as RW´s were everything you needed and the dark story from D1, was tuned down to fit a brighter, mainstream market.

The issue that D2 had was that all casters were never that item dependent in the first place. All they cared about was +levels, kinda like PoE works. Also I'm not sure I played the same story. They were both kinda dark. I mean if we add the whole D2 story you essentially are losing out in both games. And it is actually a good story aspect that D2 tells us the story of all 3 D1 characters (Blood Raven, the Sorcerer in the Arcane Sanctuary and the Lone Wanderer). And D2 and D1 had a story that worked well together. D3 essentially messed it all up, before that I found the story cool and interesting.

And I'm not even sure about that claim that D1 is considered the best ARPG up to date, I think that title does go to D2/LoD. And I just googled a few lists and the only other ARPG that is sometimes able to beat out D2 is Skyrim, which is another good one for sure. But like Morrowind opened up a new Genre (First and also Third person ARPGs), so did Diablo opened up topdown ARPGs. Because essentially all that came after Diablo copied a lot from it and even though Diablo set such a great scaffolding for top down ARPGs Diablo II easily improved on it. So if you look at it from a pioneering sense Diablo is king, because making Diablo was a risk Ultima existed but Blizzard wanted to make a big title, similar to how they wanted to improve Warcraft and make a big splash with its successor (which as well easily is one of the best RTS games of all times). But if you look at which one is a more complete game you have to give it to D2/LoD.

For that analogy it is very similar with Morrowind and Skyrim. Morrowind was a pioneering game, not the first of its kind but it was incredible successful so it encouraged other games of its kind. But again Skyrim is easily the more complete game, even though they stripped a lot of complexity.



Having that out of the way I agree that sorting isn't really needed, nor is sorting something you can easily slap onto something. What I would like to see in Path of Exile is logging, seeing what killed you and eventually getting funny char stats (like how often you died while being afk :P).

Also if I would love one thing changed in D3... it is definitly their stupid map. I know there are many things in Diablo III that annoy people. But the thing I couldn't stand is the fact that you cannot walk while the map is open... which did work in D2 and I think even in D1 you were able to walk with an open map, but I'm not sure about that one.