Game News Diablo III Open Beta Announced

[Tigranes]

They might not make a perfect system, but at least they can make one with interesting choices. There are very few interesting choices in D3 character progression at the moment.

After a wizard playthrough my sense is it's an easier Diablo 2 that's had a few features removed, some bad voice acting added, and then the whole thing dunked in some crazy photoshop filters. I thought D2 was terribly boring in SP, though, so will try and get a feel for it in MP. Tigranes#1519 is tag if anybody's interested.

 

[Black]

They might not make a perfect system, but at least they can make one with interesting choices. There are very few interesting choices in D3 character progression at the moment.

Considering max level is 13 that doesn't say much.

 

[almondblight]

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?

Halfway through normal on your first run you should realize that mana is worthless. If you're a caster you should realize strength and dex doesn't do much good early on. I mean, pretty much reading the descriptions would tell you that. If you were starting your first melee character, I can see you thinking added strength would be useful, but by the end of normal on your first character (really earlier, but I'll be generous) I would expect most people to realize that if they want to inflict more damage, strength isn't going to be helping them.

I guess if you think that being able to waste a few points on your first build because you upped the mana is a plus, then, hell, your choice.

Is it really so obvious from the first character you create and I'm just retarded?

Pretty much.

[quote="FeelTheRads, post: 2061890, member: 9361"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.[/quote]

No, it's "if it's broken then it's better it's removed than to be kept in the game." I'd love if Diablo III had a great skill system. I'd love if it had a great dialogue system too. I'm not going to bitch about the removal of dialogue options, though, because they weren't important in D2. In D2 character building was about skills and equipment.

Anyway, now you auto-pickup gold too, you don't have to click on it anymore. So yeah, more . I don't even have the option of NOT picking it up!

 

[made]

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.

Travel allows exploration. I don't see exploration as filler. In fact, I consider it an important part of RPGs. Much like combat, it only becomes filler if it's badly designed. Many RPGs have boring and tedious combat that only serves to pad playtime. Yet I don't wish they'd just do away with combat entirely, but instead improve it so it's no longer boring and tedious.

 

[Metro]

It depends entirely on how a town is designed. If it has a few places to explore and a lot of character then I don't consider it 'filler' to walk around. If, however, it's as bland as a Mount & Blade city then, yes, walking around it is pointless and you're better off with the menu system they use. But, again, all of this revolves around how well designed a city is -- i.e. it isn't a statement of fact rather a reflection of how much development effort went into creating it.

 

[Palikka]

Do you have to clear normal to be able to enter nightmare?

Also, how exactly does the healing work in D3? Sometimes when my barbs hp went below 50% he said something close to 'I'm healed now' and then his hp went full again.. Did I just misinterpret the whole thing or what? (I do know about the health globes/hp potions)

 

[adure]

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!

no achievements, just Bonus xp...

 

[Vault Dweller]

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.

Travel allows exploration.

Not always.

Take ToEE's Hommlet's quests, for example. What was there to explore? Or running all over the land in Gothic 2 after you did it the first time. I liked Gothic 2 and played it through twice, but all that running was probably 30-40% of the game, if not more. Or running through BG's Alkathla. Or running through Bloodlines.

I don't recall anything that made all that "traveling" worthwhile or absolutely necessary.

I don't see exploration as filler. In fact, I consider it an important part of RPGs.

Of course. You never know, there might be another barrel with loot behind that corner.

 

[Mystary!]

Do you have to clear normal to be able to enter nightmare?

Also, how exactly does the healing work in D3? Sometimes when my barbs hp went below 50% he said something close to 'I'm healed now' and then his hp went full again.. Did I just misinterpret the whole thing or what? (I do know about the health globes/hp potions)

You probably got a health globe without noticing it.

I discovered something terribly broken with the Witch Doctor. His second standard attack summons spiders to fight for him, he can trow these out faster than they die, and because their attacks are considered standard attacks they proc lifesteal. Which means he can just sit back and spam spiders that heal him and tank enemies that will never even get close enough to hurt him in the first place.

 

[Infinitron]

Vault Dweller:
Human beings like exploration. It's a primal instinct and many (not all) people find it satisfying. There's a reason hiking simulator RPGs sell ten million copies.

It's okay to not make it the focus of your game, but don't pretend it's something trite, "filler" or fake.

 

[FeelTheRads]

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?

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.

 

[Black]

I'm open to your suggestions, I'd also gladly hear what multiplayer games with stats/skills reward originality and penalize wiki builds.

 

[Vault Dweller]

@ Infinitron:

Which hiking simulators? Games like Gothic and Risen, or the pretty ones like Oblivion and Skyrim? Is it possible that t's not the exploration aspect that drives sales sky high, but the pretty graphics?

Then again, there wasn't much to find in Gothic and Risen, whereas Oblivion and Skyrim are generously sprinkled with caves, forts, and dungeons, in which case it's less about exploration and more about "practically unlimited" content for lesser minds.

Overall, exploration in RPGs is associated with filler - you explore to find filler items, filler containers, filler combat, filler quests (oh hey man thanks for stopping by 'cause I need 10 wolves pelts). I'd say that as a feature it works only in sandbox games, where you can actively interact with the environment - climb walls and rocks, levitate, swim, dive, jump.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Is it really so obvious from the first character you create and I'm just retarded?

Pretty much.

Fine. I'll give you that. I haven't given it much thought when playng andd only really played Diablo 2 two times... of which one time I only got close to the end without finishing and the other time finished on Nightmare too. And I doubt I had a "perfect" build.
Would that character get his ass kicked on Hell? Quite possibly, but I still don't see why other builds should be removed. It's quite obvious that on higher difficulties you have to put more thought into it and you have to powergame it, but why should I be forced to do that? "Failed" builds are fun too.

Black: I don't know. I'm not a game designer. But simply removing options because they're not the best (although they are perfectly viable) is simply stupid, decline and so on. It might get you a perfect, or close to perfect, system, but it will also get you a very basic system. If we give up on complexity because it's difficult to do... well... then we shouldn't complain about any decline at all.
And again. Why not remove any non-perfect build from all RPGs then?

 

[Black]

I'm not saying that giving up on making the perfect system is a good idea, but expecting blizzard from all developers to do something ground-breaking is naive. So yeah, it is decline but not nearly as big of a deal as people make it out to be.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Nobody's talking about a perfect system. The D2 system worked and supported a large variety of builds. Sure, if you wanted to make an uber build, the path was pretty narrow, but a lot of people had fun making all kinds of builds and that's what's missing.

Things like:
http://diablo.wikia.com/wiki/Melee_Sorceress

 

[fizzelopeguss]

but it will also get you a very basic system.

What's "very basic" about 22 actives + 5 runes per skill, and 16 passive abilities? (ie, barbarian)

 

[Black]

Nobody's talking about a perfect system. The D2 system worked and supported a large variety of builds. Sure, if you wanted to make an uber build, the path was pretty narrow, but a lot of people had fun making all kinds of builds and that's what's missing.

Things like:
http://diablo.wikia.com/wiki/Melee_Sorceress

And in D3 you'll be able to make something like that too I think. Like http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/wizard#WiglSh!afb!YaZZZc
The difference being you won't have to respec and change your gear completely if you want to drop the melee part and go for more standard wizardry stuff.

but a lot of people had fun making all kinds of builds and that's what's missing.

I get that, but from blizz's perspective it's better to make it more streamlined/casualised and thus making many more viable builds than having lotsa builds with only few of them being really viable on inferno.


And then there's this- http://www.diablowiki.com/Class_Builds_(Diablo_II)
That's a horrendously low number of good builds taking into consideration that Diablo 2 LOD has 7 classes, 98 levels to gain, 4 stats and shitloads of skills. Even though most skills are simply filter before you hit level 30, like might -> concentration -> fanaticism.

I know, I know, some people may not want to have a "good" build, they may want to have a build that's fun for them. But playing many multiplayer oriented games has taught me that the majority goes for the metagaming builds anyway, be it UO, GW, D2, Helbreath and so on. I guess that's the difference between having a single and multiplayer oriented game.

Also, since you're here, read this- god, fix AoD's optimization, loading times. Game itself runs fine but the load times are huge and it eats up so much resources while it's running in the background. Can't even watch youtube videos if AoD is running.

 

[Infinitron]

I'd say that as a feature it works only in sandbox games, where you can actively interact with the environment - climb walls and rocks, levitate, swim, dive, jump.

Sure. Just walking around a big map in an isometric Fallout or IE-like game has less appeal.

Although, exploring the Sword Coast in Baldur's Gate 1, clearing map by map, was a very memorable experience for me in high school. And once you'd visited a map, you could fast travel to it or through it whenever you wanted. That was pretty ideal.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The difference being you won't have to respec and change your gear completely if you want to drop the melee part and go for more standard wizardry stuff.

Since when it's a good thing? You pick a build and stick with it (develop it further). Otherwise, why even have classes? What if I'm bored playing a barb and want to cast some spells for a change?

I get that, but from blizz's perspective it's better to make it more streamlined/casualised....

Nobody doubts that part.

And then there's this- http://www.diablowiki.com/Class_Builds_(Diablo_II)
That's a horrendously low number of good builds taking into consideration that Diablo 2 LOD has 7 classes, 98 levels to gain, 4 stats and shitloads of skills. Even though most skills are simply filter before you hit level 30, like might -> concentration -> fanaticism.

In my humble opinion, there are a lot more viable builds than what's on that list.

Also, since you're here, read this- god, fix AoD's optimization, loading times. Game itself runs fine but the load times are huge and it eats up so much resources while it's running in the background. Can't even watch youtube videos if AoD is running.

We will. Probably in 2-3 weeks. With one programmer, it's nearly impossible to be on top of everything.

 

[Black]

The difference being you won't have to respec and change your gear completely if you want to drop the melee part and go for more standard wizardry stuff.

Since when it's a good thing? You pick a build and stick with it (develop it further). Otherwise, why even have classes?

Oh come on, when Guild Wars did it people considered it a huge incline because you don't have to re-roll your character if you spend your points wrong or if you want to try something new. Now Diablo 3 does it and it's bad.

What if I'm bored playing a barb and want to cast some spells for a change?

Play a magic user class?

In my humble opinion, there are a lot more viable builds than what's on that list.

Okay then, when was the last time you played the latest version of D2 LoD on hell? Me, not so long ago, tried awakening my greed for ph4t l3wt with D2 and lemme tell you, if you want to actually kill stuff on hell and not be killed, it's restrictive as fuck. Not only in terms of skills and stats, but even in terms of equipment and even the god damned merc and HIS equipment.

 

[Marsal]

Or running through Bloodlines.

I don't recall anything that made all that "traveling" worthwhile or absolutely necessary.

Don't go there, bro. You made a design decision that clashes with your game world and now you're trying to justify it. That's cool, if unnecessary. Just leave Bloodlines out of it.

The hubs were rather small and there was pretty much no exploration, but finding people to feed on, using sewers as Nosferatu, reinforcing the sense (illusion) of place, setting and cohesive world is worthwhile. Immersion has become a dirty word because of Bethesda and their retarded design, but if done right, immersion can make the game more than the sum of its parts by making players overlook otherwise obvious limitations, linking disjointed mechanics into a cohesive whole. Pacing (rhythm) is very important in any game. Stringing quests or combat encounters one after another is not a good way to design a game. Things you consider filler are not always (just) filler.

If you were a composer, would you cut every composition to just the theme and call the rest filler?

 

[Black]

Also, a lengthy post on stats in d2 and d3.
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/3811455085?page=1

 

[Vault Dweller]

Oh come on, when Guild Wars did it people considered it a huge incline because you don't have to re-roll your character if you spend your points wrong or if you want to try something new. Now Diablo 3 does it and it's bad.

Didn't play it, can't comment.

I played D3 open beta and all I can say is that I like how the first 10 character levels play a lot less than how they play in D2. Maybe later, when you have all skills and runes, the system really opens up and blows D2 out of the water, but it remains to be seen.

What if I'm bored playing a barb and want to cast some spells for a change?

Play a magic user class?

My point exactly.

In my humble opinion, there are a lot more viable builds than what's on that list.

Okay then, when was the last time you played the latest version of D2 LoD on hell? Me, not so long ago, tried awakening my greed for ph4t l3wt with D2 and lemme tell you, if you want to actually kill stuff on hell and not be killed, it's restrictive as fuck. Not only in terms of skills and stats, but even in terms of equipment and even the god damned merc and HIS equipment.

I think that 1.09 path was my last. Hell's difficult (always was), but I wouldn't go as far as calling it restrictive. Sure, good equipment helps a lot, but it's hardly a requirement.

 

[Black]

I played D3 open beta and all I can say is that I like how the first 10 character levels play a lot less than how they play in D2. Maybe later, when you have all skills and runes, the system really opens up and blows D2 out of the water, but it remains to be seen.

For a multiplayer game, being able to respec just like that is good. Whether with metagame change, patches changing skills and balance or even simplest mistakes and so on, it's the way to go.

My point exactly.

I'm lost.

I think that 1.09 path was my last.

A lot has changed since 1.09, especially when it comes to equipment. You can have a paladin with level 1 zeal beat the shit out of everything if he has the hottest runewords, charms and merc while a "well rounded" pal with 20 in zeal, its synergies, fanaticism and so on won't do jack without good equipment.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Nobody's talking about a perfect system. The D2 system worked and supported a large variety of builds. Sure, if you wanted to make an uber build, the path was pretty narrow, but a lot of people had fun making all kinds of builds and that's what's missing.

Things like:
http://diablo.wikia.com/wiki/Melee_Sorceress

And in D3 you'll be able to make something like that too I think. Like http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/wizard#WiglSh!afb!YaZZZc

There'll be multiple builds for melee wizards.

Arcane orb+arcane orbit

Diamond skin.

Storm armour+reactive armour.

they'll all find a place in a melee build somewhere.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Don't go there, bro. You made a design decision that clashes with your game world and now you're trying to justify it.

Now I'm trying to explain why we made this decision. I understand why some people don't like it and think it clashes with the world, but it doesn't make it an undeniable fact.

The logic goes like this: I don't have to run back and forth between NPCs anymore + there are no containers to loot (FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE CONTAINERS HOW CAN I EXPLORE THE GAME WITHOUT CONTAINERS WITH SWEET SWEET LOOT?!!!) = the world is unnecessary; they should have just made slides instead!

So, a proper world in RPG is nothing but a colorful background for the containers and filler combat? No containers - no reason to have one?

I think not.

The hubs were rather small and there was pretty much no exploration, but finding people to feed on, using sewers as Nosferatu, reinforcing the sense (illusion) of place, setting and cohesive world is worthwhile.

Let's imagine for a moment that clicking on a manhole would prompt a menu (a-la the taxi driver). You can select a hub/place to travel and - voila - you're there. Would it have killed the immersion completely?

People to feed on - well, you had to run around a lot, which made you thirsty (don't recall for sure, but I think), hence the need to feed. There were plenty of people to feed on during "missions".

Immersion has become a dirty word because of Bethesda and their retarded design, but if done right, immersion can make the game more than the sum of its parts by making players overlook otherwise obvious limitations, linking disjointed mechanics into a cohesive whole.

Different strokes for different folks. What's immersive for one person does absolutely nothing for another. I knew that some people won't like what we did, so the reaction doesn't come as a surprise.

Stringing quests or combat encounters one after another is not a good way to design a game.

Is that a fact? Undeniable and indisputable?