Auction House Online: The Game (Diablo 3) is a MASSIVE decline

[Semper]

you already said this a thousand times. diablo was and ever will be a simple arpg. what's your problem again?

 

[Black]

Fallout 3 sucks.

 

[Whisper]

you already said this a thousand times. diablo was and ever will be a simple arpg. what's your problem again?

Decreasing amount of choice - further dumbing game down for casuals.

p.s.

I will try to explain.

I am playing now Avernum. I've made some mistakes in building my fighter from start and then later in skill selection - so game is harder for me. But this is consequence of my choice. I dont want magic button to respec into awesome character, since this would make my initial starting choice meaningless.

Why plan and think over options if you can change them in second? D3 removes thinking about choices you make. Why would you if you can correct one you made in next second?

If you choice do not have any consequence (bad or good) - this choice have no weight. There are 0 consequences in new D3. Choices in character build are meaningless.


TL&DR: I want choices in character development in D3. Choices come with consequences. If you dont have consequences for choice - choice have no weight.

 

[Semper]

dumbing game down for casuals.

it's a hack'n slash. those are made for casuals...

ps: you don't have to explain what you already said a thousand times.

 

[Whisper]

it's a hack'n slash. those are made for casuals...

It doesnt mean it should be more and more dumb, i mean casual friendly, easily accessible, you name it.

D2 wasnt that dumb as D3.

 

[Semper]

D2 wasnt that dumb as D3.

for sure it was this dumb and simple, BUT there was an option to make it even dumber. you could pump all your points into energy and play your totally fun and unique char with awesome majestic c&c... look, ima baba with lots of manna manna now bow down, great evil. ima bare knuckel champ!!1

 

[Captain Shrek]

D2 wasnt that dumb as D3.

for sure it was this dumb and simple, BUT there was an option to make it even dumber. you could pump all your points into energy and play your totally fun and unique char with awesome majestic c&c... look, ima baba with lots of manna manna now bow down, great evil. ima bare knuckel champ!!1

So a game has to be smart enough to accommodate all the retards who could not play it in the first place, right? I think you understand D3 target audience better than you think.

 

[abija]

The only problem is you compare it with some imaginary D2 that had amazing skill choices and depth. Look at http://diablo.wikia.com/wiki/Bow_and_Crossbow_Skills, with the exception of strafe everything there is basically a rune effect. Yet apparently building a new char just to maximize one of those skills was oh so much fun.
Even funnier is how everyone agrees Diablo games are just for simple dumb fun yet some argue it's better for such a game to have "builds" based around using only a couple of skills and require hundreds of hours of play to develop. Screw jumping in game to use a variety of skills for 30 mins while blasting dumb monsters, better grind for 6 hours for that hammerdin that's gonna be oh so much fun when the build is done.

 

[Semper]

So a game has to be smart enough to accommodate all the retards who could not play it in the first place, right?

we're talking about diablo and not an abstract topic about game design.
there was never a time in the whole series where the development of your character was complex. you've had to be really dumb to make wrong choices. in case of diablo i spent my points blindly and was bored to click through this shit. that has nothing to with the amount of time i played but because it was that simple. now this is gone and i am totally fine with that. so you don't like? who the fuck cares?!

that doesn't mean that i support dumb systems. in fact i hate it when a complex rule system is watered down for accessibility and a bigger audience.

 

[Captain Shrek]

That is the point. If it was not useful (lets not call all this "Complex") earlier they should have made it useful and not remove it. But I tire of this argument. it has been made several times already in the same thread.

 

[attackfighter]

Got both Semper and Syril on my ignore list, who is everyone talking to?

 

[Semper]

That is the point. If it was not useful (lets not call all this "Complex") earlier they should have made it useful and not remove it. But I tire of this argument. it has been made several times already in the same thread.

for sure it would be a better game and i am all for interesting char development but who the fuck expected that?! there's still enough customization, imo more than in d2.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

And here is really what we come to: Diablo and Diablo II were designed as self-contained experiences that could be played over and over again, with players being able to invest themselves into different builds, strategies, character types, and even gameplay focus (i.e. PvP, PvE, magic finding). Sure, not the deepest and most complicated stuff ever, but the "real" game was in optimizing character builds and playing multiple times, with different ways to enjoy the game depending on preferences.

Meanwhile, Diablo III is built primarily as a way to encourage users to spend more money over a longer period of time. Without permanence, there are no real choices to make, hence less replayability - the emphasis is now on new content which is either going to cost players extra or will in some way profit Blizzard (real money auction house). The greater and greater focus on the loot treadmill means not just that there's more of that stuff to go around, but that gameplay elements have actually been removed or reconfigured in order to support that treadmill, rather than coexisting with it to form overarching gameplay systems. Despite the superficial aesthetic similarities between the titles the fact is that the overarching design goals of Diablo III are very, very different from the first two games.

As much as I agree with everything you've said, I think there's another reason why they went the way they did. It has to do with their ambition to have competitive PvP in the game, and their experiences with both WoW PvP and SC2 multiplayer. To make a long story short, SC:BW was a great competitive game, because it focused on providing players with a lot of tools and options, therefore facilitating real strategic development. There is a recorded period of more than two years of Protoss being statistically weak against Zerg at the highest level of play, and it was eventually solved with a strategic breakthrough (aka, a build that allowed Protoss players to do what was previously thought impossible), and not a patch.

Thing is, trying to balance WoW PvP, instead of convincing Blizzard that variety and diversity are indeed the way to go, has made them think that homogenization and streamlining is what they really need. You can look at the history of SC2 patching, and especially their developer blog commenting upon the changes, to see that what they really want, is for the game to be played the way they envisioned it. "This does not work the way we intended it to." is their primary explanation for nearly every change. Instead of focusing on creating a great system, and letting players take advantage of it, they begin with their intended gameplay, and design the system to encourage it. This is a good way to design single-player games with very tight gameplay mechanics, but awful for multiplayer.

And so, in their mind, the simpler D3 character customization is, the easier it'll be to balance for their precious PvP. A skill causing trouble? Just nerf the skill or appropriate rune, it doesn't affect anything else. The skills are so neatly compartmentalized and independent of each other, it's extremely easy to manipulate them for balance reasons.

 

[abija]

It has to do with their ambition to have competitive PvP in the game, and their experiences with both WoW PvP and SC2 multiplayer.

Their stance on PvP has been the same since they announced it and they repeat it once in a while. It will NOT be competitve.
It's really simple, the way D3 is built you have only one option when the game starts being too hard for your char, getting better gear, which for most players would translate into AH (aka $$$$$$$$$$$ for Blizzard). You can't doubt your build, no real gamer would ever doubt his skill so it must be the gear.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

It has to do with their ambition to have competitive PvP in the game, and their experiences with both WoW PvP and SC2 multiplayer.

Their stance on PvP has been the same since they announced it and they repeat it once in a while. It will NOT be competitve.
It's really simple, the way D3 is built you have only one option when the game starts being too hard for your char, getting better gear, which for most players would translate into AH (aka $$$$$$$$$$$ for Blizzard). You can't doubt your build, no real gamer would ever doubt his skill so it must be the gear.

It's so not competitive that they have several PvP-exclusive maps and a matchmaking system? I always read that as a preemptive excuse, in case it's terribly balanced.

And if it's not competitive, then what's up with the delay? Is it that hard to implement the same matchmaking they have in every game they've made since WC3?

 

[Raghar]

You know when I played .hack I said, it's just a parody on MMORPG, in real MMORPG it would be disaster. Getting skills only from your equipped items...

Then in .hack you have choice. Create stuff by transformation into better, and hope for best results, or get it from NPC around by trade. Surprissingly authors thought every player would be abusing bastard, nobody would roleplay, thus when they gave that free level item, or was it invicibility item, they looked like they expected everyone to cheat and use it. Of course just before a large battle I though, well the first boss was really big problem, thus considering I bit ironmanning it would be wise to use it before combat doesn't matter on consequences with admin. The result was a bit surprise. So tactic that depende on that stuff working as it should failed...

Luckily some NPCs are boneheads, and to get proper items from them is HARD TM. So ultimatelly it ends in hacking (and transforming), or grinding (to get items for trade), or really grinding (when you want these items as drops). I doubt MMO D3 players would be as bonehead as NPCs from .hack. Money talks which ultimatelly would kill D3 item system, and because these items have strong effect on character exactly the same as in .hack, it would maul D3.

Perhaps they wanted to make profit from this trading, but there is a line where ends a game and begins something else. I wouldn't call it online poker like stuff, I would compare it to banking system. Which however means D3 should be subject to the same regulations as banks, stock markets, and lending organization. The highest restriction from each of them.

While Blizzard has some tradition so bank like level of state intervention will not be a problem, I doubt they would be happy to be subject of the same regulations as stock markets.

 

[Tigranes]

There is a recorded period of more than two years of Protoss being statistically weak against Zerg at the highest level of play, and it was eventually solved with a strategic breakthrough (aka, a build that allowed Protoss players to do what was previously thought impossible), and not a patch.

That sounds really interesting, actually. Can you explain a little bit more, or at least give me something I could google? I was never that into SC (in a filthy betrayal of my Korean heritage), so I've never heard of this.

I didn't get enough of a feel on how D3's loot tables, item design and skill progression would work just from the beta. I was struck by the fact that even on 1-player normal, drops seemed to be less frequent and spectacular than D2, which isn't quite what you'd expect given what they seem to be doing with stats and builds. I also had a lot of hopes on runes compensating for the loss of other build flexibility options, and it does make 'lower level' skills viable later, but the runes themselves are levelled/tiered, too, and you get everything automatically anyway. I just can't imagine why they would remove any and all investment of player choice - you just swap out items and skills. There's no need to respec because there's nothing to 'spec' to begin with.

 

[Livonya]

The thing that will be interesting with D3 is how the real world money auction house will work for players.

Blizzard will be charging a flat fee for a player to list an item, and it sounds like the item will only be listed for a set amount of time. This isn't a real auction house where people bid for items, but where the player selling the item has to set a price.... and people either buy it or not.

Each account will get some free listings, but once those are used up I wonder how eager people will be to actually list their items when they have to pay a flat fee to do so.

A player could easily go into debt trying to sell their items, and lots of players will do exactly that and then they will never list anything ever again.

There will probably be a class of players that essentially are role-playing a merchant. They will have to find good items, pay attention to current trends in prices and item demands, and price their items in an attempt to make money but also to avoid having an item not sell and thus incur a fee.

That is kind of interesting.

I can see all sorts of issues developing with that. I actually find this the most interesting aspect of D3, and I don't mean that as a snide criticism. I honestly find this quite interesting, and how it works is probably the most revolutionary thing about D3. If it works and players don't grow to hate it then it will change many things about the way these persistent on-line games work.

 

[Stabwound]

Haha, Blizzard takes both a flat fee for listing and a percentage of the final sale price? They're going to make a killing from this. They've essentially set themselves atop the entire Chinese farming market, which is huge business... in a contained market that they've created themselves. They can manipulate it any way they please, from creating artificial shortages of certain items, adding new items altogether, etc. It's fucking brilliant from a business standpoint.

I guess with D2 there were 3rd party websites that did the same thing, so people were going to buy/sell items for real money in D3 regardless. I remember D2 items selling on Ebay as soon as the game launched. I agree that it will be very interesting to see how this all pans out. The first thing that will come to everyone's mind is that Blizzard themselves will create rare items to sell straight from the company, and since everyone is going to rage and over it and believe they're doing that no matter what, they might as well do it.

I can envision some extremely butthurt people arising from this new system. I'm not sure what measures they have in place to avoid kids using their parents' credit cards, and it seems like it will be a magnet for people trying to fish accounts. Steal account -> buy item -> join game with secondary account -> drop item, pick it up on secondary.

They must be very confident that server issues aren't going to drop people's bought items into a black void either. Then again, you probably forfeit your right to hold Blizzard liable for any lost items when you accept the terms of the marketplace.

 

[DraQ]

No one can say that characters aren't more flexible in D3 than D2 or D1. This is an objective fact; all you have to do is look at the skill lists for the games and compare them.

*Of course* they are more flexible - that's exactly what you get by removing RPG elements (no matter how modest they might be) from a game - if everybody can do everything, and there is no need, or even way to specialize.

There is no doubt that Fallout character would have far more flexibility if you could have 10 in every SPECIAL attribute and 200% in every skill.

There is no doubt each character and the entire party in BG would be far more flexible if every character had 18 in every stat, and all abilities of every class, 5 stars in all masteries, while advancing in all classes at the pace of single class character.

There is no doubt that similar would apply to *every* RPG, crawler and H&S out there.

There is also no doubt that this change alone would make all those games suck, remove last vestiges of RPG mechanics they otherwise have, and greatly lessen the depth of gameplay and any character system they have.

Dumb fucks like Whisper will herp a derp all day about there being less choice in D3 and that is simply untrue if you take 5 seconds to look objectively at the skills and runes.

*Of course* that if choices don't stick, then there is less choice.

Choice is measured by its effect on the gameplay, if you can backtrack from any choice at no cost - not even wasted opportunity one, then there is no choice.

What's next?

Defending oblivion as pinnacle of choice in cRPG?
Citing biowarian choice as best kind of choice to ever grace cRPGs?
Claiming that doom is an RPG?
How about CoD?

Moron.

Also:

The sanctity of this place has been fouled.

The smell of derp surrounds me.

because those are builds, you fuckin' moron... if i have to choose skills from a "big" pool and can't use them all at the same time*, it's called a fuckin' build

So, by this logic Call of Duty has builds, because you can only carry and use two weapons at a time.
More so, switching to different weapon combination requires actually picking those weapons up, meaning more persistence of builds in CoD than in D3.

Clearly, CoD = best arpeegee evar!!!1

*free respec is another story

But it is not, so it is not.

Seriously, kill yourself.

Preferably like this guy here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_gunshot_suicide#cite_note-3

I don't think I've ever witnessed this much fuelled by sheer idiocy before.

Which are shit, rare or non existent!!!!!!!!

What the fuck is an artifact, reducing rad by 10, good for if radiation giving artifacts with any worthwhile properties give 20, 30 or 50?
Bollocks!
Thats the worst fucking thing about Stalkers. Both of them!

And it could have been so good... but noooo, they simply HAD to make artifacts give radiation - fucking constantly! Like no other mechanic or idea was available....
Why only stupid radiation? Why not different properties you might need to combine at certain times? (yeah, yeah there was like two of those - shut up!)
Why not several different negative effects? Why not more diverse positive ones instead of fucking damage reduction or damage increase and SHIT!!!??!?!?!?!
Bollocks!

fuckin...mummble...vodka ideled...grummbble...lazy..mummbblee.. ruskies.... mummble...
:shakes fist in general direction of Russia:

1. There are plenty of rad removing artefacts.
2. In SoC there are diverse side effects, not just radiation.
3. In no STALKER there is any artefact that increases damage.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Haha, Blizzard takes both a flat fee for listing and a percentage of the final sale price? They're going to make a killing from this.

precisely the reason why the game has been retooled to be all about equipment
not just with the redesign, with the accessibility toned up now blizzard has an army of potential auctioneers out there

imagine the mad scramble when an expansion pack with new uniques is released

shit why not add investment firms in there that give money to various vendors in return for 7% monthly return

 

[Livonya]

Haha, Blizzard takes both a flat fee for listing and a percentage of the final sale price? They're going to make a killing from this.

precisely the reason why the game has been retooled to be all about equipment
not just with the redesign, with the accessibility toned up now blizzard has an army of potential auctioneers out there

imagine the mad scramble when an expansion pack with new uniques is released

There is one positive thing to this new system, however.

The final difficulty levels will be HARD. They have said they will be the hardest ever for this sort of game, and that could actually be true. If they want players to buy and sell items then the items must matter. The one way to assure that is by making the final difficulty levels very, very hard. All the characters will be exactly the same other than equipment, so it would be folly for a character with marginal equipment to do well at the higher difficulty levels. Much like how free2play games on Facebook try to wear away at your patience in an attempt to get you to spend, D3's difficulty should be so intense that you are forced to either find or buy really good equipment. That does work as kind of a plus for those that want a challenge, assuming that the finally difficulty levels are challenging.

shit why not add investment firms in there that give money to various vendors in return for 7% monthly return

If you are buying and selling items for real money then you will have a small savings account with Blizzard. Much like PayPal for instance. So while you are making a joke about the investment firms, they could in fact add things like NPCs that convert your savings account to a money market account. That would be pretty funny. Blizzard will be holding your money, just as PayPal does, so if the $$ volume increases I assume they could start offering the same sort of services that PayPal offers... and eventually I can see Blizzard having to dole out MISC-99 forms to the larger accounts in the USA just like PayPal does.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

There is a recorded period of more than two years of Protoss being statistically weak against Zerg at the highest level of play, and it was eventually solved with a strategic breakthrough (aka, a build that allowed Protoss players to do what was previously thought impossible), and not a patch.

That sounds really interesting, actually. Can you explain a little bit more, or at least give me something I could google? I was never that into SC (in a filthy betrayal of my Korean heritage), so I've never heard of this.

I guess you can google the Bisu build. You won't find any win percentage graphs, because the BW community doesn't care about them, but I'm fairly certain it was over 2 years of Zerg winning more than 55% games against Protoss. If it were SC2, there would've been a patch for that shit after 3 months.

 

[Stabwound]

No one can say that characters aren't more flexible in D3 than D2 or D1. This is an objective fact; all you have to do is look at the skill lists for the games and compare them.

*Of course* they are more flexible - that's exactly what you get by removing RPG elements (no matter how modest they might be) from a game - if everybody can do everything, and there is no need, or even way to specialize.

*snip*

I'm not even going to respond to the strawman shit because I refuse to defend an argument I wasn't even trying to make.

The fact is that there are far more skills in total, and probably viable skills, than D2. If you even read the discussion at that point, that was the topic. I even agreed in the post that you quoted, and conveniently left out, that I agree that lack of permanence is bad.

And besides, if we're going to talk about BG or any other D&D1/2 computer game, outside of dual-classing it's not exactly the most customizable of character systems. Every priest is going to have the exact same spells, every mage is going to have the exact same spells, and guess what: you pick and choose from a certain selection of them that you'll have access to at any given time, just like Diablo 3. And hell, 95% of players are going to have the same equipment at any given part of the game. On top of that, stat points mean absolutely nothing outside of combat, so no one but larpers are going to roll sub-optimal stats; most everyone puts 18 in their main stats.

I wish D3 had more user-customization in regards to stat points and emphasizing certain skills, but whatever. I think it will be fun for what it is. If it's not, then I wasted $60.

 

[Raghar]

However games are not about flexibility, they are about restrictions.

I don't think I've ever witnessed this much fuelled by sheer idiocy before.

So would you like to play FF VII instead?