This game ruined Diablo 3 for me...

"

Sickness wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

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.

It's a false statement.
Those are not factors that decides if a game is made for casuals or not.

What does the fact that they made skill system less interesting for people who only play normal and far greater for people who play inferno tell you?

That the game is made for casuals? That is just utterly ridiculous.
You need to get over yourself, just because it's not just the way you like it doesn't mean it's "designed for casuals".

"

miljan wrote:

"

Antilurker77 wrote:

miljan, I don't understand your reasoning at all. D3 still allows you to make terrible loadouts if you feel like gimping yourself. Nothing is forcing you to take "OP builds" (which D3 shouldn't have anyway).

It doesn't allow me to choose more skills, but to be less effective. I said it 10 times, i don't play so it is hard, i play to create a character that I want, with more than 6 different skill if I want. Also as thepmrc said, they removed fun of leveling.

"

miljan wrote:

"

AgentDave wrote:

I didn't say that they weren't choices (Just that they aren't legitimate choices. Which, they're not, no matter how you want to slice it or try to make up your own definitions.). I said it was terrible game design. Anything you can do to remove these false choices should be done, especially once they can be identified.

Respecs are irrelivent.

Il repeat, if you can complete the game, it means they are legitimate choices.

"

AgentDave wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

"

AgentDave wrote:

I didn't say that they weren't choices (Just that they aren't legitimate choices. Which, they're not, no matter how you want to slice it or try to make up your own definitions.). I said it was terrible game design. Anything you can do to remove these false choices should be done, especially once they can be identified.

Respecs are irrelivent.

Il repeat, if you can complete the game, it means they are legitimate choices.

Are you a professional game designer? Which games have you designed, where I can see your name in the credits?

Because, if the answer is "No" or "None", then you're just making shit up now.

"

miljan wrote:

Lol. So you don't have any other argument? Lol, than better you should not post anything, just to replay

"

thepmrc wrote:

Another idiot trumpeting his opinion as fact. Again that statement was an opinion as I said in my post. Considering that D3 is not out what makes you think that the skill system is less interesting for people who only play normal and greater for people who play inferno? Its your f**king opinion. I will reserve final judgment for the full release, but everything I have seen and read thus far pushes this game to a casual market in my opinion. As far as 'getting over myself', I believe only one of us is dressing up opinion as fact and that is you, so how bout you get over yourself bud.

"

AgentDave wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

Lol. So you don't have any other argument? Lol, than better you should not post anything, just to replay

That's all the "argument" I need.

I am a professional. You are not. You speak of game design (specifically "allowing choices") as if you have a clue. I am telling you, you don't have a clue. Do you tell your doctor what medicine to proscribe?

You are welcome to have your opinion. Like the game, don't like the game, think that they should have more dead babies in the game - that's all on you.

But when you start talking about how they should have made the game, without a inkling of how one makes a game, and more important, what it takes to make a GOOD game...

"

sicknetss wrote:

Ok so let me rephrase it:
What does the fact that everyone here seem to agree that they made skill system less interesting for people who only play normal and far greater for people who play inferno tell you?

There is no need for insults, even if you can't answer my question.

"

AgentDave wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

Lol. So you don't have any other argument? Lol, than better you should not post anything, just to replay

That's all the "argument" I need.

I am a professional. You are not. You speak of game design (specifically "allowing choices") as if you have a clue. I am telling you, you don't have a clue. Do you tell your doctor what medicine to proscribe?

You are welcome to have your opinion. Like the game, don't like the game, think that they should have more dead babies in the game - that's all on you.

But when you start talking about how they should have made the game, without a inkling of how one makes a game, and more important, what it takes to make a GOOD game...

"

miljan wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

Player make choices to create the character they want, that is not limited by forcing you to max 6 skills. Fun comes from that, making the character that you want. Fun doesn't come from making character that is OPbut does not play the way you want.
Also the game has 4 difficulties, but you complete the game on normal, so if build is good enough to complete the game, it means that build is viable enough. Not anyone will play last difficulty.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

Who is talking about primary atack? I'm talking about dmg skill that have CD,but do much more damage than primary skill in that 1 use. It makes you use more dmg skills, and not only primary dmg skill.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

It metters. Any rpg includong d2 has it. But im talkin here about dmg skill, not primary dmg skills that dont have CD

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

You can't explain it because your not correct.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

When I create a build, I do not create it to be powerful, but create it to play as I want, thats why games are called RPG.The option has moved to items, that is not a good option.

I dont want black and white, i want more, as i said before all colors between, as in any rpg game.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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

Everything is a option. There are non optimal builds that will not be able to play last difficulty, but possible to complete other difficulty. I call that a option. You complete the game when you finish normal. Idiotic is to limit the player so he can't do whatever he wants.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

You can't choose passives, because you can choose 4 or 5 skills, including pasives. Wee are talking here about d2 without skill points and skill tree. There would not be more viable builds, becouse all viable builds did as you said maxed 4 skills. With no skill points, system would do exactly that. There would be exactly the same number of viable builds. But there would not be less viable builds. As you see, it doesn't add to more viable builds.

"

Autocthon wrote:

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.

I do not penalize my self because i want harder game,I penilayz my self becouse I want to create a different build that is interesting to me, and uses more skills.

Im trying to say 10 times alredy, tha removing skill points never increase the number of viable builds. Visabel builds are increased by skill design and balance. You are only talking about max builds. Im not talking about min/max builds, skill points dont add to viable builds, but they also dont remove tham, but the thing they add are less viable builds.

"

thepmrc wrote:

"

AgentDave wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

Lol. So you don't have any other argument? Lol, than better you should not post anything, just to replay

That's all the "argument" I need.

I am a professional. You are not. You speak of game design (specifically "allowing choices") as if you have a clue. I am telling you, you don't have a clue. Do you tell your doctor what medicine to proscribe?

You are welcome to have your opinion. Like the game, don't like the game, think that they should have more dead babies in the game - that's all on you.

But when you start talking about how they should have made the game, without a inkling of how one makes a game, and more important, what it takes to make a GOOD game...

I love that statement. I am a professional therefore I know everything!!!!

What game design company do you work for? Where is your name in credits for a good game? Why should anyone believe anything you claim? Why are you such a complete tool?