This game ruined Diablo 3 for me...

"

Hypatian wrote:

Someone asked him for his credentials, and he provided them. How is that bragging?

Becouse he thinks he is right by saying that he is "profesional".

"

RodHull wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

Your question again is completely invalid based on the fact that nobody here has played Inferno, and there is no way to judge who is going to only play normal and who will play inferno.

How can you discern who here is going to play normal vs inferno? Answer that one question definitely.... oh ya you cant.

If I find that I enjoy D3 I won't be playing normal, my bots probably wont either but they will most likely make a good deal of money on the RMAH.

Ive been watching this argument with interest, and sorry to say to a neutral observer your opinions are looking increasingly ridiculous and ill considered. Earlier you (and others to be fair to you) have repeatedly suggested that D3 is somehow a casual friendly easy mode noob land game because it removes player choice and somewhat redundant levelling mechanics.

Sickness has repeatedly addressed a VERY relevant question to you which you cannot answer, you just keep dodging the issue and reverting to insults or petty jibes like the last line of the above post which has nothing to do with the discussion.

Inferno is where 90% of the game will be played within literally months (possibly weeks) of release. Likewise in POE most of the players will spend most of their time in MOC or whatever the release equivalent on that is. The very nature of loot games dictates that playing repeatedly on normal is pointless, the very idea of the increased difficulty playthroughs means any serious dedicated gamer will spend most of their characters time at the highest level of difficulty or as its more commonly known, the level cap.

The fact that D3s system allows a more varied and rich endgame experience with more viable skill choices and builds indicates that actually contrary to your and others belief, it very much does not focus on casual players as most of those wont ever reach inferno. Id love for you to address this point but I fear again you will sidestep the point cause it doesn't fit into your argument.

Also on related note the way you talk about casual players like they are some disease is frankly sad and smacks of the worst gaming elitism. Without casual players there would be no games industry...

Thank you for interjecting. Sometimes it takes a bystander stepping in to enlighten. Although I will never agree that D3s system allows for more variety, I will agree that the inferno argument makes much more sense when presented this way. I highly doubt anyone will really only play the game on normal difficulty, hence why I thought the initial question that was proposed was ridiculous.

It is people who state their opinions as fact that I view as a disease, not casual gamers, and that's what it seems we have here supporting D3s game mechanics as perfect and customizable. Sorry I am not a fan of the system at all, not in the least. If you are a fan, good, enjoy it, but don't tell me that it is fact that it is a better system. I will take offense to this.

And I am definitely a bit defensive/aggressive the past few days. Quitting a 10+ year smoking habit and I think Im taking it out on the forums a bit....

"

miljan wrote:

The thing that annoys me when people say they are right because: they are smart, professionals, and other crap... From your arguments people should see that you're a professional, bragging with it only lowers you down and doesn't make your argument valid in any way.

That's ridiculous. We call them "credentials" in English (which I sense may not be your first language? not a jibe, I can't really claim a 2nd language, maybe a little Spanish, so you're ahead of me there if it is.) because they're what make you "credible". Believable.

I can talk out my ass and sound convincing, but push comes to shove, the doctor is the guy who went to medical school, not the guy who "sounds good". The lawyer is the gal who went to law school, not the gal who "sounds good". The insurance agent is the person with the license, not the person who "sounds good". (you get the idea.)

"

miljan wrote:

"

Autocthon wrote:

Is somehow LESS than D2 in "customizability" simply because you cannot unintentionally (or intentionally) choose to fail. He doesn't understad that ALL OF THE OPTIONS available in D2 for customizing your character are STILL available in D3, and unlike D2 ALL OF THE OPTIONS ARE VIABLE

They are viable not becouse of removing skill points. Why? Simple, will you use blizard if it does more dps than ice arow? No. It doesnt fix balance. Why? Becouse skill points remove doesnt fix balance. Skill design fix balance. If it has more balance, it means more viable builds.

That logic is so flawed. You don;t even understand WHY skill points fuck up balance in the first place. Even though I have explained it a half dozen times.

One skill point is not equal to another EVER unless all skills have the exact same stats. Any good D2 player will tell you that Frozen Orb sorceresses are the most efective sorceress builds. And that "altering" that will only make the game harder for yourself. Also any good D2 player will tell you that a sorc build not using Blizzard/Frozen Orb/Chain Lightning/Meteor/Fireball is so weak as to be non-effective in hell.

Sure you can use them. But that's basically gimping yourself out of being able to complete 1/3 of the game. That's 33% of the game you're missing out on (or worse unimaginably frustrated as you die over and over again not understanding why you can't do anything).

There is no such thing as a skill point system that is "baanced" across the full spectrum. Unless those skills are give-take skills (PoE Passive tree for instance) and even then balance at best is dubious. Adding skill points to D3 can ONLY DECREASE build diversity unless those skill points are non-issues (read completely useless for achieving your primary goals and therefore wasted space).

You fail to realize that making the "choice" to be gimped is not a valid choice. It is being stupid, and basically cutting yourself out of content (and getting you kicked from games when you inevitably cannot pull your own weight).

D3 allows ALL the customization of a skill point system through use of item kits. Adding skill points would only upset the delicate balance that the designers have been working on for over 2 years. And once added they would completely destroy any ability for true balance. All so YOU could play Gimpdalf the Gimp Wizard

Yah. Bad design choices are bad.

"

lilbuddha wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

Here, this might help you:
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/choice-and-conflict

BAM! Exactly what I was thinking.

--------------------------

Also, I'd like to point out something else. This "agentdave" guy talks about "Game Design 101". Well, in my experience, nearly ALL of the great games of any generation were done by people who never went to "Game Design 101", they created the ideas themselves, they didn't seat themselves within some "learned" talent, it was true talent.

Where I'm going is that while D3 might stick to all the "rules of game design", that does not make it a good game. Just as MANY titles of today fit the same criteria, yet simply don't deliver on any promise of being fun, good, worth your time.

I was referring specifically to the decision to remove a false choice of skill points and attribute points. I don't think D3 is perfect, nor do I think it stuck to all the "rules of game design", nor do I disagree that doing things which are "against the rules" can turn out great.

For example, many of my friends like the card game Dominion. I don't really like it. I find there to be several "game design-y" issues with it. But push comes to shove, enjoying the game is a personal decision, and if they enjoy it, it's a good game (for them.).

"

AgentDave wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

The thing that annoys me when people say they are right because: they are smart, professionals, and other crap... From your arguments people should see that you're a professional, bragging with it only lowers you down and doesn't make your argument valid in any way.

That's ridiculous. We call them "credentials" in English (which I sense may not be your first language? not a jibe, I can't really claim a 2nd language, maybe a little Spanish, so you're ahead of me there if it is.) because they're what make you "credible". Believable.

I can talk out my ass and sound convincing, but push comes to shove, the doctor is the guy who went to medical school, not the guy who "sounds good". The lawyer is the gal who went to law school, not the gal who "sounds good". The insurance agent is the person with the license, not the person who "sounds good". (you get the idea.)

Thanks for providing that, I didn't really think you would. Not to attack you but really there is no reason to present the fact that you are a 'professional'. I was a professional gamer for quite a while making a living off of D2 and poker... does this mean that my opinion holds more weight? No, it holds the same weight as anyone who has any vested interest in the topic.

Sorry if I offended anyone here. It was not my initial intent. It is pretty obvious that there are people who like the system and think it is moving in the right direction and there are others who feel it is moving in the wrong direction. Only time will truly tell. As I have said before I really hope that I am pleasantly surprised with the game at some point. Either way, the key is I will still be here playing and supporting POE as I really love what GGG has going here.

In my opinion Diablo 3 beta was fantastic, the look the feel of the game is incredible. Poe has a long way to go if it wants to be somewhat descent competition. Its the little things that set this two games apart(story, lore etc...) but Poe has a potential that I hope doesn't go to waste.

"

Sickness wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

Everything is a choise. Your wrong if you think a less viable choise that can complete a lower difficulty is not a choice.

Here, this might help you:
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/choice-and-conflict

Hadn't seen this before. I love this.

"

Autocthon wrote:

......

I'm getting tired of this because we are going around in circle. Completing normal d2, is it completing the game? Yes. If i can make a build that works in normal, it means it is viable. If it's viable it is a option. If its not viable on higer dificultes, you have a free respect to change that.

About the video, they said one interesting thing about wow. You are going to search for build that does most dps. But, if all skills do same dps you will not be able to be wrong. That is the thing Im saying all time. Balance skill don't come for removing skill points, but from balancing skill and the design, or better said dps output.

"

AgentDave wrote:

I was referring specifically to the decision to remove a false choice of skill points and attribute points. I don't think D3 is perfect, nor do I think it stuck to all the "rules of game design", nor do I disagree that doing things which are "against the rules" can turn out great.

For example, many of my friends like the card game Dominion. I don't really like it. I find there to be several "game design-y" issues with it. But push comes to shove, enjoying the game is a personal decision, and if they enjoy it, it's a good game (for them.).

The removal of skill points, doesnt mean it is balanced. If skill are not balanced so that there are with more dps, no skill point system will not change that. The skils will stay unbalanced even if there are no skill points.
Removal of skill points removed only less meaningful choices,but it doesn't add to more choices.