Looting -- The official thread for discussing the loot system. Updated 18th March, 2013.
" What did D3 bring? IGN: dedunmamma
|
|
" ..meh. Sure, D3 is fine as long as you never played it. :D " D3 is an ARPG? When did that happen? Its a Disney style on-rail arcade game with character loadouts and an auction house simulator. With a nice wet coat of WOW paint slopped all over it. The reason D3 failed is because the fans of D2 wanted a game like D2. Simple as that. " Well, D3 did bring POE into the light. :D |
|
" This. Also, loot options will never be here. The game will also not fail because of said lack of loot options. Calling it. Interested to hear what D3 brought to the "arpg" genre though. Domination:
Lvl 58 Power Siphon Witch |
|
" This. Because it was so nice, it had to be said twice. |
|
" D3 pretty much catered to players who complained about the way D2 was. Even the guy in charge was that kind of player. You can see it in ever single excuse Jay Wilson used when he gutted out all the fun ARPG elements from D3. And the result is D3. Thats the way i look at it. Its even funnier when you think about the comment Jay Wilson used when D3 was brought up by the D2 creators. Its almost the same attitude used by players wanting options. Im not sure what D3 brought to ARPGs. Its almost impossible to call it a ARPG. But, in POE. D3 brought a ton of posts/thread with players asking for instanced loot, auction house and a full respecs. And its mostly those kind of players who helped make D3 into the game it is today before jumping ship. Last edited by Vooodu#7002 on Mar 30, 2013, 11:40:30 AM
|
|
" 1. Instanced loot is just a preference. FFA is no different. Saying one is better than the other is just saying "my opinion is superior". 2. Auction House has been asked by quite a few because the trading is cumbersome and not very entertaining. Some people don't like or appreciate bartering because it forces a social element to the game. 'Nuff said. Pros and cons to both ways of trading. 3. Full respec is pretty much in the game itself, but it requires a certain investment or decision by the player. Let's just say that full respec doesn't ruin games so long as there is a certain required amount of effort. I really do like/appreciate the regret orbs in this game. What does this amount to? Everyone has opinions on how they don't like X or prefer Y, but I don't go calling people names for disagreeing with my opinion. As for the whole options debate, I've still haven't seen a good reason against it per se. I would still use FFA, and the people you fellows label "carebears" would have fun however they so desire. _________ In before insults (mud) starts flinging again. IGN: Mibuwolf Last edited by mibuwolf#7946 on Mar 30, 2013, 1:08:57 PM
|
|
" I find myself wondering why some here like yourself are so vocal about not wanting to see certain improvements to an ARPG. The genre itself has been evolving and changing since likely before you were born - or at least too young to play without sitting on your daddy's knee. I remember playing ARPGs like Xanadu, Legacy of the Wizard, and Hydlide when they first came out in the mid to late 1980s. If that sounds farfetched, you should know that I graduated high school in 1982. I have been playing console or computer games since the mid to late 1970s... just doubt if any of those titles could be considered ARPGs (but some were considered RPGs). I even designed a small computer game in high school - back when PC's were still using cassettes and floppy discs were new (our hs was considered modern because we had two computers for students to learn on). Other titles that I played during the time that were very close and an influence on the genre included the original Dragon Warrior, Swords and Serpents, Heretic, and the original Zelda on the original NES. I've also played ALL of the Elder Scrolls games in the complete series all the way back to and including Arena. The genre has changed much since then - but it would not have if people like you had their way... and I'm sure there were plenty of naysayers then too. I played both Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 when they first came out in 1996 and 2000 - what is interesting is that neither at the time were marketed as ARPGs. They were billed heavily as MMORPGs and Blizzard made much of the fact that D2 made it into the Guinness Book of World Records as the largest MMORPG of the time (you know MMO - that word you and other "old skoolers" hate). It was only later that they were accepted into the ARPG genre... and there was a lot of debate about that. This was due to the fact that they had significant elements that were not included in other titles of the genre at the time. You present yourself as an "old skool" veteran that knows something about ARPGs (which remains questionable), but you fail to acknowledge and comprehend that the most significant element about them is that they have changed and evolved with new developments and ideas over the years. They have never been stuck in a vacuum. Diablo 1 & 2 are celebrated BECAUSE they were innovative at the time. To replicate a game mechanic from the 90's without considering innovations and developments made since then makes POE an archaic tribute to D2 rather than a stand alone ARPG. It is appropriate to introduce player-based ideas into a game within the genre - The genre would have ceased to exist long ago without them. To attempt to suppress innovative player-based ideas for improvement because of a "my way or the highway" mindset is the worst kind of dogma. Integrating options such as those that have been discussed (FFA, timed, allocated) improve the playing experience for a wider player base - that is win/win for everyone. If approaches such as yours were influential in the genre back in the early days we would probably still be playing linear side scrolling games complete with funky theme music (I did like some of those, though). EDIT: edited for clarity. Last edited by Thulza_Doom#0768 on Mar 31, 2013, 2:10:32 AM
|
|
|
Please re-shorten the timer. Like many hundreds of people upthread, I am dissatisfied with the current timer length, which encourages people in PUGs to stop fighting and stand over loot while they wait for the timer to expire. The new timer length has made this much worse.
One possible idea would be rather than greyed out, simply have the item only be visible to a single player for the first X seconds. This should theoretically serve the needs of both sides; the "I want my loot" crowd would get their chance to grab the loot exclusively, and the rest of us wouldn't have to wait for loot vultures, because as soon as someone sees loot, it'd be grabbable. |
|
" Idea has been suggested before. It was knocked down because GGG has no intentions of "hiding" loot from players. Ideally if there is to be a change it would be better off as a compromise of the best of what GGG wants and what many of the players want. GGG wants competitive based looting and with each patch it is going further away from that concept, and that seems like such a shame. However, I don't find it necessary to force instanced looting or longer timers on players either because there are indeed a fairly large percentage of players who were happy with the prior system. As for the timers... well... that's been upsetting players left and right. Too long. Too short. Don't like X. Don't like Y. IGN: Mibuwolf Last edited by mibuwolf#7946 on Mar 30, 2013, 4:15:30 PM
|
|
" The problems with D3 is the fault of the devs and no one else. Do you think the PoE Devs would consider making changes that they thought would hurt or kill the game? They know they can't do everything players ask them to do, they use their own common sense based on large amounts of feedback. Standard Forever
|
|
