What they're doing wrong in D3

"

facehead wrote:

I wanna weigh in on this topic and specifically this post.

(a) I'm totally fine with no stat points. If you've ever played D2 for a prolonged period of time I think you can see the logic in this decision. Basically, stat builds became so homogenized and meaningless (stat requirements for gear, rest in Vit) that it really is a non-issue removing it.

(b) No skill points is actually a fine idea as well. The reason Blizz has given for the change is that the D2 skill point system forces players into this mindset where they're focussing on only one or two main abilities (all points get dumped in these and the rest into synergies). Median XL used this very system, and it always amuses me when I hear people tout MXL on the one hand and then decry D3 on the other.

What bothers me about the skill system isn't the lack of points, it's this idea of free respecs. In D2 your character's identity was essentially your build. If you saw a cool Nova Sorc build you wanted to copy you had to reroll a character from scratch. In D3 this doesn't exist. See a cool Wizard Wave of Force build you want to copy? Just reassign your skill points. In a way it feels like nothing's sacred.

(c) I actually liked the Trait system as they described it, so it is rather disappointing hearing them say they've tossed that in favour of three passives. Unfortunate.

(d) Sixty is just a number. They've said many times that they want leveling to cap to take as long or longer in D3 as it did in D2. I think people get fixated on this idea that sixty is a smaller number than ninety nine and instantly think that equates to less time.

(e) RMT AH is the main thing that truly annoys me with this game. I've heard a lot of people talk about it being optional and thus not affecting you as the player, but that argument seriously doesn't fly with me. In D2 if someone paid real money for items they were cheating; they were circumventing the game mechanics in place to get an advantage. What Blizzard is essentially telling you is it's OK to cheat. And there is a world of difference between something that is done illegally under ToS and something that is condoned by Blizz.

I have absolutely no problem with Blizz trying to turn a profit. At the end of the day they're a business and they want to make money. But the problem is the method they've chosen defeats the fundamental purpose of an ARPG: to gather increasingly better loot.

(f) On the subject of art style... yeah, I'm not keen on it. I'd prefer it if it looked more like D1 & D2 (read: like PoE), but it's not a deal breaker. It's also worth noting that Siege Breaker ripping the Barbarian in two continuously plays in my mind. I'm seriously hoping that is a taste of gory things to come.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to all of the upcoming ARPGs. Torchlight 2, Grim Dawn, Diablo 3, Path of Exile. I love the genre and can't wait to play all of them.

"

DragonCutta wrote:

At gamescon they just announced that they are developing it for Consoles too, imo it kinda ruins the experience and history behind it to just market it to a whole new audience but hey now blizzard just goes to where the money is now with no heart or soul : /

"

PW_Shea wrote:

3. I'm less bothered by the RMAH than others and am willing to see whether or not their gamble pays off or if it will, as you point out, cut the legs out from under the game (another point is that Chris, while more or less stating that they wouldn't be doing an RMAH-style system did say that he understood Blizzard's decision - I think we are going to see a lot of this sort of thing in the future as devs try to feed their Hollywood summer blockbuster-esque budgets with some sort of revenue stream that isn't a large flat fee or an ever-increasing sticker price on the box).

"

facehead wrote:

"

PW_Shea wrote:

3. I'm less bothered by the RMAH than others and am willing to see whether or not their gamble pays off or if it will, as you point out, cut the legs out from under the game (another point is that Chris, while more or less stating that they wouldn't be doing an RMAH-style system did say that he understood Blizzard's decision - I think we are going to see a lot of this sort of thing in the future as devs try to feed their Hollywood summer blockbuster-esque budgets with some sort of revenue stream that isn't a large flat fee or an ever-increasing sticker price on the box).

"Cut the legs out from under the game" is probably not quite what I was getting at. I just think it's fundamentally wrong from a design POV. At its core the game is about finding better loot, so what's the point if you can just buy it?

I think the RMAH will end up being a huge financial success, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Also, did you get that Chris thing from one of the streams? If so, I was the one that asked him what he thought of it. :)

"

PW_Shea wrote:

OK, that's sort of what I meant by "cut the legs out from under the game" - if it's an ARPG that's all about loot and customization through loot - and the decision to carve out proper competitive pvp, skills points and attribute points seems to really highlight this fact - then by giving players the option to potentially buy their way past at least part of the content (esp. endgame content) seems to me to, well, cut the legs from under the game. But Blizz is smart and I'm sure this wasn't some snap decision, so they probably have all sorts of testing to back up this decision and show me how I'm wrong. I guess what I mean is "cut the legs out from under the game for the player that pays their way to Inferno."

Maybe Blizzard is thinking - hey if you want to buy the game, a level 60 with all their gear and try to play the game from there, then by all means do so (but you are likely to be frustrated by Inferno and bored by other content and quit). Blizz still gets their fees and the sellers still get paid, so the only person "hurt" is the person who cheezed their way to the end.

"

facehead wrote:

I agree with all that.

There's also another potential problem (for players, not necessarily Blizz) in that the truly rare items will likely never be sold for in-game gold, which will essentially force people to play the RMAH in some way. I hope that isn't the case... but... it seems like it may well be.

"

Antracite wrote:

My only problem with Diablo 3 is the art direction.