Game News Diablo III Open Beta Announced

[Monolith]

I thought you were still talking about AoD.

Anyways, I've never used a Wiki for class building in D2. But since there is a pretty extensive one that shows how you can make different chars with different stats, how is leaving out ANY choices when it comes to different stats NOT dumbing down? You've pretty much shown yourself that the choice mattered.

Perhaps they came up with a more complex system, adding more stat-independent skill choices, but 1) somehow I doubt that and 2) it simply raised an eyebrow.

 

[EG]

We don't walk in real life.

Why walk virtually

It' s a paradigm shift / end of an era!

 

[FeelTheRads]

Of course, it is convenience if it suits you, if not, it's dumbing down.
Duh.

So having to watch the walking animation for 2 minutes is what you'd call complexity in an RPG?

Well, there are those mentally disturbed who think it's "true" and "old-school" not to use quick travel in Betharda's hiking simulators and instead waste hours on just walking with that mind-numbing slow speed and then fap about how awesome the game is because it lasts 10000+++ hours.

Lack of assignable stats =/= not wasting hours by just walking.

 

[EG]

. . . Behtesda's walk speed is a bit . . . Well. Fucked.

You know.

 

[made]

Lack of assignable stats =/= not wasting hours by just walking.

Devs can't figure out how to make stats interesting and meaningful - they remove stats altogether and tell you it's for the better

Devs can't figure out how to make travel interesting and meaningful - they remove travel altogether and tell you it's for the better

Same shit

 

[Vault Dweller]

Not really.

Playing with stats is one of the staples of RPG mechanics. While the stats in D2 weren't overly meaningful, they did offer some variety and some choices. Static stats might as well not be there.

As for traveling, in pretty much all RPGs it's the most meaningless and boring activity, especially within a town. A filler, basically. Sure, you can spice it up by placing something on the player's path (an ambush! an item! a quest giver!), but it doesn't improve the drudgery of running between NPCs. It merely distracts you from it.

Some people like filler, some don't. If you feel that filler makes games better, I'm happy for you, but let's not pretend that cutting filler is the same as cutting stats.

 

[almondblight]

But since there is a pretty extensive one that shows how you can make different chars with different stats...

There isn't. In D2 it's "enough strength to get the armor you want, everything else into health" for casters, and "enough strength to get the armor you want, enough dexterity for a 85-90% chance to hit, and everything else into health" for warriors. Anything else was a waste, and auto-stats in D3 is certainly an improvement.

 

[Stabwound]

I don't really buy the "hurr everyone just copied wiki builds in D2" line. It might be like that now, but for a while (years) after D2 was released, there were no such guides that every single player followed. The patches tended to mix things up a lot with regard to skills, and I believe it took a long time before everyone started falling into playing cookie cutter builds.

What's wrong with having skill trees and giving respecs for gold? Even if the respecs were free, it would still be a more unique system than giving every player every skill.

 

[Black]

The patches tended to mix things up a lot with regard to skills, and I believe it took a long time before everyone started falling into playing cookie cutter builds.

Ah, yes, that was another fine thing. You finally had your perfect frozen orb sorc in 1.09?
LOL SHE'S SHIT IN 1.10

 

[Creamy Muffin]

Tried it, won't buy it. The only remote fun class is the barb, and barely. The whole thing feels like a neutered/gutted D2 knockoff.

Also, I refuse to give any money to Blizzard since they've turned to shit after TFT.

 

[FeelTheRads]

But since there is a pretty extensive one that shows how you can make different chars with different stats...

There isn't. In D2 it's "enough strength to get the armor you want, everything else into health" for casters, and "enough strength to get the armor you want, enough dexterity for a 85-90% chance to hit, and everything else into health" for warriors. Anything else was a waste, and auto-stats in D3 is certainly an improvement.

Hey, guise, I know!

How about they remove all the extra loot, hmm? After all, everybody is using pretty much the same items they get in multiplayer trades! So why would there be more? Let's improve that! Hey, why not have the items appear in your inventory once your level is high enough to wear them? Wouldn't that be the best improvement ever?

Why add more options when you can remove even those that are there? It's absurd! Improving means removing!

 

[Creamy Muffin]

Hey, guise, I know!

How about they remove all the extra loot, hmm? After all, everybody is using pretty much the same items they get in multiplayer trades! So why would there be more? Let's improve that! Hey, why not have the items appear in your inventory once your level is high enough to wear them? Wouldn't that be the best improvement ever?

They're saving that feature for D4.

 

[Stabwound]

It could have been A Bard's Tale level dumbed down, where you don't even have an inventory as far as I remember. If you find a better weapon it gets equipped, if it's worse it turns into gold magically.

Wow, Blizzard really dropped the ball by not implementing this feature.

 

[almondblight]

How about they remove all the extra loot, hmm? After all, everybody is using pretty much the same items they get in multiplayer trades! So why would there be more? Let's improve that! Hey, why not have the items appear in your inventory once your level is high enough to wear them? Wouldn't that be the best improvement ever?

Why add more options when you can remove even those that are there? It's absurd! Improving means removing!

You didn't play D2, did you?

 

[good little toastboy]

If there are even 2 useful runes per spell, there will be so much more customization than in D2, it's not even funny. Therefore I really fail to see how this is a neutered gutted D2. Gameplay-wise it seems much better to me and definitely miles ahead of stuff like Torchlight or Titan Quest.

Also this thread needs more straw men.

 

[Livonya]

New Achievement! You destroyed 6 containers at once!
New Achievement! You destroyed 7 containers at once!
New Achievement! You destroyed 8 containers at once!

I hope there will be a wiki to explain how to get the maximum containers at one time! I am thinking 15 might be the max. I will have to play a again a few times to see what the highest number I can get!

What a fantastic mini game!

 

[Stabwound]

It's too hard to judge the entire game on a demo that is 5% of the game, anyway.

Yes, it seems to be flawed, and yes I hope they let you disable the achievements popping up all the time. Exactly what is the point of giving achievements for arbitrary things that you randomly accomplish without effort at all? I guess it's to make people feel like they're really making accomplishments, but who the hell gets satisfaction out of getting a badge for killing 5 monsters at once?

After researching the skill system, it's probably more flexible than D2 if all skills really scale and stay useful like they're boasting.

 

[Livonya]

It's too hard to judge the entire game on a demo that is 5% of the game, anyway.

Fair enough, though at $60 this is pretty much the only taste that most of us will get. And we didn't choose what was in the demo, the people that want me to give them $60 choose what was in the demo.

I bought D1 and D2 and enjoyed them for what they were, but that was a long time ago and now there are a lot more game options. With the explosion of independent companies I can't see ever getting bored enough to pay for D3. If I really want to play an aRPG I can buy a whole bunch of different games for $60... Path of Exile taunting me with their $10 beta entry, or Krator with their $16 beta entry, etc, etc...

In all honesty, I think D3 is exactly what it should be. I only downloaded it to try it. I never had any allusions that it was going to speak to me.

The vast majority of people that will play it will enjoy it. They don't want a challenge. They don't want some difficult hardcore game. They just want something that looks cool and works and has lots of flashy colors and achievements. More power to them and to Blizzard. D3 will make an endless pile of cash. I can't really fault them for that.

There was a time when I would have really resented what I would call the mainstreaming of PC games, as there was a long drought of games that spoke to me. It was frustrating to watch game play take a back seat to fancy graphics and the mass marketing of games.

I would maybe buy 1 game a year. Maybe. And a lot of times that game didn't actually do much but make me miss old games.

There was an actually correlation between the growing interest from the mainstream in computer games and my growing frustration with the lack of actually interesting and challenging games.

But I actually think things have been improving in the last two years, and Kickstarter shows that there is room for both D3 and the crowd that will love D3, and the crowd that would rather play AoD for example.

Recently, I have bought and played a lot of interesting games that I actually enjoyed. Crazy.

So while I didn't really find much in D3 that interested me, I can see that it will serve the massive amount of people that do like that sort of thing well. It worked, it looked good, it was easy to understand, it was easy to play. Hell, the things that I would change would only piss off most D3 gamers.

Anyway, this is my long winded way of saying, that while I could take a bunch of pot shots at D3, I won't. (well, other than the cheap shot I already took 2 posts up).

Live and let live.... as long as I am allowed to enjoy some niche games that actually make me think then I am perfectly fine with the fact that millions of people are going to have a great time with D3.

 

[FeelTheRads]

How about they remove all the extra loot, hmm? After all, everybody is using pretty much the same items they get in multiplayer trades! So why would there be more? Let's improve that! Hey, why not have the items appear in your inventory once your level is high enough to wear them? Wouldn't that be the best improvement ever?

Why add more options when you can remove even those that are there? It's absurd! Improving means removing!

You didn't play D2, did you?

I did. However I don't remember the game telling me "this is the best build, dumbass, this is the only way to play".
I remember trying stuff for myself and find what works and what not. And, as opposed to what you seem to think, there's more than 1 viable build.
I don't know why you think this should be removed. Probably because you're a fucking moron.

 

[Grunker]

It's like someone has removed "GURPS" and inserted "Path of Exile"...

Sorry bros

 

[almondblight]

I did. However I don't remember the game telling me "this is the best build, dumbass, this is the only way to play".
I remember trying stuff for myself and find what works and what not. And, as opposed to what you seem to think, there's more than 1 viable build.
I don't know why you think this should be removed. Probably because you're a fucking moron.

So tell me, how many builds had different stat setups? Mana was a dump stat for all classes. So were down to three stats now. For casters, which are about half the builds in the game, stats were enough strength for the equipment you need, enough dex for equipment and maximum block if you want and use shield, and the rest in vitality. The same goes for most combat builds, since they often focus on non-physical damage (think strength is important for a lightning zealot? An elemental assassin?). I suppose a class that uses mostly physical damage could find it a bit useful, but the small increases you get aren't going to be noticeable (considering you already raised it a decent level for your gear).

So your choices with Diablo 2 stats boil down to:

1. If you're a caster using a shield, do you want to put all extra points in vitality, or max out block first and then put all points in vitality?

2. For some atypical classes, you might consider putting points to get a small damage boost (add to strength for most weapons or dex if you're using bows), or the rest in vitality.

Aaaaaaaaaand that's about it. That's what you're missing. For half the classes whether you want more block before you sink everything into vitality, for ~7% a question of if you want a small damage boost before sinking everything into vitality, and for the rest sinking everything into vitality.

When people argue about D2 builds, they argue about what equipment to use, they argue about skills, but they never argue about stats.

 

[KPence]

They should balance the stats, not remove them. Did they make the beta easier than the real game will be? It's pretty banal at this state.

BTW:
If you want to play the beta after this weekend, try this

email: magnussvarstad@gmail.com
password: reddit222

Don't abuse it though, only a few people can play on the same account.

 

[Zed]

Normal is supposedly retardo-easy. The game starts at Nightmare for normal people.

 

[FeelTheRads]

So tell me, how many builds had different stat setups?

All of them? Because when I started the game I didn't know the "perfect"* way to play it?
Even if there's this "perfect" way to play it, I'm not sure why shouldn't there be other ways too.. you know, for those poor souls who don't guess/divine this "perfect" way right from the first game.
Where's the fun if not in discovering this for yourself? That's why D2 was better. Because it was a little more than a software for generating loot, like D3 is.

However, I may not be that well versed in D2. So tell me, how long did it take for this "perfect" builds to be discovered? Is it really so obvious from the first character you create and I'm just retarded? If it takes longer than that, then you still think other builds are useless and you should just be given the best one from the start? And also, do you think Blizzard really intended for those to be the "perfect" builds instead of it being a result of poor balancing? Seriously, your argument is fucking stupid. It's basically: it's broken so why fix it when you can remove it.

they argue about what equipment to use, they argue about skills, but they never argue about stats.

Well, then, now they won't have to argue about skill either since everybody will have the same skills.


* Btw, plenty of dumbshits around here think mage is the only way to play Arcanum because it's the strongest build. I guess then, that an improvement for Arcanum would be removing everything but the mage skills instead of actually balancing the game.

Edit: in before perfect balancing is impossible so every choice and option should be removed because why play if you don't play the best build? amirite?

 

[Black]

They should balance the stats, not remove them. Did they make the beta easier than the real game will be? It's pretty banal at this state.

They should, but honestly I have no idea how to do this. Balance isn't something that automatically gets better in games as technology progresses and as far as I know no one has yet managed to make a truly balanced system with no meta builds.