This game ruined Diablo 3 for me...

We have 2 games in beta state. I am a die hard fan of D2 (and its inevitable mods) and strangely enough, PoE is more appealing to me. That absolutely doesn't mean D3 is crap. In fact it's fun and all that. But PoE has something that reminds me of my beloved D2.

Yes D3 is officially the sequel, but D3 to D2 is just like Dragon age 2 is to Dragon Age: Origins. It looks and feels oversimplified imho.

Then there is Poe with a crapload of skills that levels up and can be slightly altered by supporting gems; a humongous passive skill tree with stat raising point and a few perks here and there to ensure diversity.

Yes many players will make a beeline for a certain buildup, but the rest will have something to experiment and enjoy.

That was my opinion. No need to fight over a game that GGG devs will most likely buy and play at launch

"

Mr_MartY wrote:

Read most of the replies, here are my thoughts:

I played D2 for years and years, and even throughout late high school/college I would still pick it up for a couple weeks until I grew bored and did something else. It's just that good of a game.

My credentials: I'm a huge Blizz fan: Warcraft RTS series, Starcraft series, Diablo series, even played WoW for a couple years.

Quite frankly, Blizz is appealing to a group of gamers that did not exist during those older times. That's fine with me, marketing is marketing and people need to make a living somehow.

The issue I have is that by making the game more accessible for others, it makes it less accessible for myself. The world doesn't revolve around me, fine, whatever.

It's really no problem for me, I just play other games now. I spent ten bucks on PoE just by gauging the activity/attitude of the forum community. If any of you have ever spent time playing an MMO, you'll know that this is an insanely stupid gamble.

Well, I'm here now. And I'm having fun, so I'll continue to do so until I stop having fun.

I highly doubt I'll ever experience that incredible immersion from when I was a kid, but certain things can get you close, or at least give you a kind reminder.

Nicely expressed. Welcome (over)board, Exile! Thanks for joining us. =^[.]^=

"

Autocthon wrote:

Skill points are a problem because anytime a skill is on a sliding scale (as I pointed out something like 3 times in this thread alone) doing anything but maxing that skill is only a NEGATIVE impact on your build. It never has a positive impact on DPS output because skills have cast times.

But implementing skill points, dont remove that option of maxing the skill you want. Removing skill points, system does that automatically. Im saying it all the time, skill points didn't remove that option. You CAN MAX SKILLS, AND IT IS THE BEST THING TO DO, BUT IF YOU DON'T WANT IT, YOU CAN'T DO IT, BECAUSE SYSTEM LIMITS YOUR FREEDOM. It is best to put all points in a skill that does dmg, but, you have a option to not put all points in it, and put in other skill that you say oh-shit skills. Your thinking of skill points are problem becouse you have a freedom to not put and max skill, but it comes from your choices, you still have a option to max skill.

"

Autocthon wrote:

It does not matter what the system is. It does not mater if the skills do flat damage or %Weapon damage or %DPS damage. As long as there is a sliding spectrum of damage on skills maxing a single skill WILL ALWAYS BE SUPERIOR to spreading points out.

The system meter for 2 things:
1. becouse of cool down, you will not be abel to use only 1 skill with most dps, but need to use min 2 dps skills.
2. becouse of weapon dmg% skills are easy balanced,so the dmg of skill are similar , and you can choose skill that fits your playstyle the most and be viable.

"

Autocthon wrote:

It does not matter what the system is. It does not mater if the skills do flat damage or %Weapon damage or %DPS damage. As long as there is a sliding spectrum of damage on skills maxing a single skill WILL ALWAYS BE SUPERIOR to spreading points out.

Yes. But as i said 10 times now, i dont want to have maxed character, I want to have less viable build that i can create, with more skills. Im not talking about more dps skills, but other skills.With no skill points system it is not possible, that directly means less builds and options, becouse I can not crate less viable builds.

"

Autocthon wrote:

Let me reiterate: D3's system is functionally equivalent to ANY SKILL POINT SYSTEM IN ANY GAME. In both systems you are picking 4-6 skills that you will use, 1-2 are actual DPS skills the rest are oh-shit buttons.

You pick that if you want most viable and strongest build. If you dont, you cant pic, that means less options.

Answer this question. In d2, if there where no skill points, and skill tree, would than be more viable builds if you can chose 4 skills?
You say skill points are problem, so removing them from d2, should fix the problem. Think, would it change anything in d2?

"

miljan wrote:

*Some stuff*

So, wait, you're mad that you can't intentionally or accidently screw your build so bad that you can't finish the game?

What kind of sense does that make? I mean, if you want an artifical challenge, you can:
Play Hardcore.
Play 1 handed.
Play without using vendors.
Play solo, in games with max players (IE, they're off doing The Den of the Rat Mother (w/e) and you're killing Joe the Crusher.)
Play without any items but a weapon.
Play with only whites.
Play with only crafted items.
Play with only items you can buy off the gold auction house, for the gold you can pick up (leaving all items on the ground.)
(and so on and so on.)

Or... Any combination of the above.

No reason or need to make it so that people can choose to suck. You can still play a meleemancer (WD) or whatever. Ok, so you can't play a bowbarb - that's not the fault of the skill system, however, that's the fault of the item system and their decision to limit certain weapons/armorts to or from certain class(es).

"

miljan wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

Skill points are a problem because anytime a skill is on a sliding scale (as I pointed out something like 3 times in this thread alone) doing anything but maxing that skill is only a NEGATIVE impact on your build. It never has a positive impact on DPS output because skills have cast times.

But implementing skill points, dont remove that option of maxing the skill you want. Removing skill points, system does that automatically. Im saying it all the time, skill points didn't remove that option. You CAN MAX SKILLS, AND IT IS THE BEST THING TO DO, BUT IF YOU DON'T WANT IT, YOU CAN'T DO IT, BECAUSE SYSTEM LIMITS YOUR FREEDOM. It is best to put all points in a skill that does dmg, but, you have a option to not put all points in it, and put in other skill that you say oh-shit skills. Your thinking of skill points are problem becouse you have a freedom to not put and max skill, but it comes from your choices, you still have a option to max skill.

Why would you EVER want to make a non-optimal choice. Players make choices because they are fun. Players do not make a choice (other than difficulty setting) in an effort to make the game harder. If you're a player who likes to make bad choices just to see how hard you can make it for yourself you are in a VERY minor minority. The way skill systems work by DEFINITION require that you meet minimum basic requirements to be at the point wherein the game expects you to be.

"

"

Autocthon wrote:

It does not matter what the system is. It does not mater if the skills do flat damage or %Weapon damage or %DPS damage. As long as there is a sliding spectrum of damage on skills maxing a single skill WILL ALWAYS BE SUPERIOR to spreading points out.

The system meter for 2 things:
1. becouse of cool down, you will not be abel to use only 1 skill with most dps, but need to use min 2 dps skills.
2. becouse of weapon dmg% skills are easy balanced,so the dmg of skill are similar , and you can choose skill that fits your playstyle the most and be viable.

No DPS skill will ever have a CD. No player will ever have their DPS skill at less than max points. Look at EVERY ARPG EVER RRELEASED. There has never been a primary DPS spell/attack/ability that was CD restricted.

What does that mean? Quite simply it means that CDs don't matter in the context of sustained DPS. Skill point systems HAVE NEVER been effective for managing damaging spells. The ONLY times skill point systems have ever succeeded at creating a semblance of balance were in games where the skill points were not tied to making your abilities useable.

As far as your rebuttal to my second point: There's no nice things I can think of to explain how you're wrong. More specifically the only way I can explain you're wrong is a way that you have consistently and completely ignored.

"

"

Autocthon wrote:

It does not matter what the system is. It does not mater if the skills do flat damage or %Weapon damage or %DPS damage. As long as there is a sliding spectrum of damage on skills maxing a single skill WILL ALWAYS BE SUPERIOR to spreading points out.

Yes. But as i said 10 times now, i dont want to have maxed character, I want to have less viable build that i can create, with more skills. Im not talking about more dps skills, but other skills.With no skill points system it is not possible, that directly means less builds and options, becouse I can not crate less viable builds.

Why would you want a WEAKER build than the game expects you to have. BEcause there really is only black and white: Either a build does what it needs to and meets benchamarks or it doesn't.

Also I would like to point out that there ARE +skill effects in D3 at higher levels. And items which interact with skills to produce the equivalent of putting points into your skills. The option is still there but it now relies on gear.

"

"

Autocthon wrote:

Let me reiterate: D3's system is functionally equivalent to ANY SKILL POINT SYSTEM IN ANY GAME. In both systems you are picking 4-6 skills that you will use, 1-2 are actual DPS skills the rest are oh-shit buttons.

You pick that if you want most viable and strongest build. If you dont, you cant pic, that means less options.

Non-optimized builds are not options. They are idiocies.

"

Answer this question. In d2, if there where no skill points, and skill tree, would than be more viable builds if you can chose 4 skills?
You say skill points are problem, so removing them from d2, should fix the problem. Think, would it change anything in d2?

Yes there would. Though to be more accurate you would be choosing 4-5 skills and a couple passives because that is actually what most players DO with the system.

90% of endgame builds which can make it through nightmare require that you specialize your points and preform a minimum degree of optimization. This is the part that you fail to realize: D3 has shifted player's ability to make builds that completely suck from choosing skills (note you can still choose REALLY bad skill loadouts just like D2 and any other ARPG) to kitting yourself with equipment. You are still free to penalize yourself and make the game as hard on yourself as you wish.

"

Autocthon wrote:

Non-optimized builds are not options.

I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, except for this absolutist statement.

They are infact option for some people. For the casual crowd who don't care about the endgame.
For the rest of us, you are ofcourse correct, the new skill system offers far more variety and balance than D2 could ever hope to do.

This is also why it boggles my mind to see people complaining that D3 was designed for casuals.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

Non-optimized builds are not options.

I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, except for this absolutist statement.

They are infact option for some people. For the casual crowd who don't care about the endgame.
For the rest of us, you are ofcourse correct, the new skill system offers far more variety and balance than D2 could ever hope to do.

This is also why it boggles my mind to see people complaining that D3 was designed for casuals.

Casuals beat normal and maybe try nightmare. For the purposes of normal ALL builds are viable unless you are being absolutely obtuse: "I rolled barbarian I bet I should max my enrgiez"

Non-optimal builds are not in fact options for actually playing any mode above normal. Whish is to say for playing any mode above "this is for the casual players, hardcore players need not apply"

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

Non-optimized builds are not options.

I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, except for this absolutist statement.

They are infact option for some people. For the casual crowd who don't care about the endgame.
For the rest of us, you are ofcourse correct, the new skill system offers far more variety and balance than D2 could ever hope to do.

This is also why it boggles my mind to see people complaining that D3 was designed for casuals.

D3 was designed for casuals. This is not a complaint, it is a statement. There are no binding choices to be made. There is a level cap that will be easily attained. No reason to make different builds of the same class as there are no binding choices to differentiate one character from another of the same class. Literally ZERO thought is required to level/build your character. The game is designed for casuals and children imo.

"

Autocthon wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

Non-optimized builds are not options.

I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, except for this absolutist statement.

They are infact option for some people. For the casual crowd who don't care about the endgame.
For the rest of us, you are ofcourse correct, the new skill system offers far more variety and balance than D2 could ever hope to do.

This is also why it boggles my mind to see people complaining that D3 was designed for casuals.

Casuals beat normal and maybe try nightmare. For the purposes of normal ALL builds are viable unless you are being absolutely obtuse: "I rolled barbarian I bet I should max my enrgiez"

Non-optimal builds are not in fact options for actually playing any mode above normal. Whish is to say for playing any mode above "this is for the casual players, hardcore players need not apply"

There is no such thing as a non-optimal build in D3, they are all the same. Your Barb example makes no sense as they have removed ones ability to 'max my enrgiez' as you put it by removing our ability to allocate our own stat points.

Diablo 3 ruined Diablo 3 for me.
I can accept the cartoonier style, I can accept the simplified game mechanics, but once you take away stat placement and (and this most than everything) skill trees, I'm out.

Path of Exile meanwhile did almost everything right (or better than D3 anyway). The only things D3 wins in are things that you can buy with a big budget (still I expect that PoE will get a higher dev budget later when it is released, won't equal D3 but).

"

thepmrc wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

Non-optimized builds are not options.

I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, except for this absolutist statement.

They are infact option for some people. For the casual crowd who don't care about the endgame.
For the rest of us, you are ofcourse correct, the new skill system offers far more variety and balance than D2 could ever hope to do.

This is also why it boggles my mind to see people complaining that D3 was designed for casuals.

D3 was designed for casuals. This is not a complaint, it is a statement. There are no binding choices to be made. There is a level cap that will be easily attained. No reason to make different builds of the same class as there are no binding choices to differentiate one character from another of the same class. Literally ZERO thought is required to level/build your character. The game is designed for casuals and children imo.

D3 was designed with casuals in mind.

However the developers stated that the difficulty of the game increases exponentially (to the point where casuals will not want to play) as it progresses and taht they do not expect any influx of the casual playr population into the Inferno difficulty (which is significantly harder than Hell).

Additionally the developers have chosen GEAR and chhoice in active skill kit to differentiate players. Shich is NO DIFFERENT from the reality of D2. Othr than the fact in D2 everyone used the same gear for the most part (because it was just taht good). Rather than relying on a contrived "skill point" system later items will interact ith skils in some way (perhaps by increasing the numerical effectiveness of certain skills) which will make players stop and question what abilities they truly want to use. There is also a "soft" respec deterrent in the form of nephalem valor, a MF/drop buff that is removed whenever you chang skills. This means that at least for the purpose of a game ou are rewarded for not changing your skill loadout. And next game you are free to change it again.

At least make an effort to understand the system instead of judging it on a 90 minute beta test with access to ONLY the tutorial. The reality is that D3 has little functional difference form D2, only that the exact "choices" you make are made in a different venue (items instead of arbitrary points, skill permanence in the sense of a single instance of playing and not in a "no going back" situation). These attributes actually make playing the game MORE fun in general as you can ALWAYS try something new instead of slogging through content you don't really want to do for the tenth... eleventh... thirtieth... time. And since ITEMS determine true skill specialization you can choose to change kits based on your newest drops, and not have to reroll just to play with a new skill that you may not even like.

Learn. To. Research. Your. Facts.

Edit: The quote you responded to was talking about barbarians in a D2 sense of trap builds. Normal in D2 was designed for casuals to, but yet you AL FORGET THAT. And pretend like it was so much greater.