Diablo IV

[Crispy]

Should I play Diablo 4, yes or no?

It's perfect for you, Liberal. You will be an excellent subordinate to SDG. His television is just *aching* for you to hold it.

 

[Skinwalker]

I have no intention of doing multiplayer, you senile retard. I'm asking (different people, not you or fatky) if the game itself is worth playing.

 

[mediocrepoet]

I have no intention of doing multiplayer, you senile retard. I'm asking (different people, not you or fatky) if the game itself is worth playing.

For you? Absolutely, just make sure you play offline to avoid the multi-player crap and you should be golden.

 

[Skinwalker]

Or mediocreposter.

 

[Desiderius]

Sometimes, but he's usually pretty good.

I'm curious about this game. Werglia needs to get back on his nicotine.

 

[Lovely Feather Pillow]

Should I play Diablo 4, yes or no?

If you're serious about ARPGs I would say no. There isn't a lot of meat on the bone and the game needs loads of balance patches just to feel right. People on the fence should wait a few months IMO.

If you're a casual/newcomer to ARPGs you might have a decent time playing through the campaign once.

 

[KIss My Ass]

Should I play Diablo 4, yes or no?

If you're serious about ARPGs I would say no. There isn't a lot of meat on the bone and the game needs loads of balance patches just to feel right. People on the fence should wait a few months IMO.

If you're a casual/newcomer to ARPGs you might have a decent time playing through the campaign once.

I am not a casual or newcomer and I'm having a blast.

 

[ADL]

What's worse to the gaming community: wokism or level scaling?

Third option: the retards who still think level scaling is bad in the year of our lord 2023. I like being able to go back through every zone in The Elder Scrolls Online and do the thousands of quests I missed during the initial leveling experience. I like being able to play with friends who started the game five minutes ago rather than telling them that they're going to have to play for a couple hundred hours without me and hit level 140 before they can clear the content I'm clearing. Meanwhile in games like World of Warcraft you're either in Dragonflight zones at endgame or you're a walking demigod that one-shots everything and it's completely inaccessible to anyone who hasn't played it like a second job. How delusional does one have to be to think that's a good thing?

If you're gonna have leveled content, make the level cap super low like lv20 where it's basically a tutorial and the majority of the base game and all updates and expansions that come afterwards are entirely endgame-focused. Guild Wars did it right almost twenty years ago and Everquest/World of Warcraft has been doing it wrong for even longer. How much more of this skinner box bullshit are you guys gonna take before you people realize it's not good for anyone and makes the games you love worse? All those zones. All those quests flushed down the fucking toilet for completely arbitrary reasons.

 

[ADL]

Level scaling and horizontal progression systems are incline. At least in games that you're supposed to play for hundreds or thousands of hours. Btw Diablo 2 would've been infinitely better with level scaling in place but go stroke your cock to the nostalgia of running Baal a thousand times over because you had nothing else to do you room temp IQ boomer nerds.

 

[Skinwalker]

To be clear, everyone who's bitching about this game supposedly being shit has already paid their seventy shekels for it. You must have, because it's an online-only game that hasn't been cracked.

Either that, or you have no personal experience to validate your negativity. Pick your poison.

 

[Lovely Feather Pillow]

Should I play Diablo 4, yes or no?

If you're serious about ARPGs I would say no. There isn't a lot of meat on the bone and the game needs loads of balance patches just to feel right. People on the fence should wait a few months IMO.

If you're a casual/newcomer to ARPGs you might have a decent time playing through the campaign once.

I am not a casual or newcomer and I'm having a blast.

You also said the game is shit. If the game was actually good that thought would have never crossed your mind.

 

[KIss My Ass]

Movement speed is a big game changer. I buffed my sorce's movement speed by about 17% and now have 2 evade charges so avoiding most elites is no problem now. Also if you playing as a sorce Fireball is an absolute must for one of your enchantment slots. I'm using blizzard in the other slot and now I'm slaughtering most mobs without too much trouble. My princess has turned into a fine beast.

You also said the game is shit. If the game was actually good that thought would have never crossed your mind.

I get mad and say things sometimes. Now that I'm becoming more familiar with the ins and outs of upgrading, extracting, crafting, the game has become very compelling. Much much deeper game that D3.

 

[Saravan]

Level scaling and horizontal progression systems are incline. At least in games that you're supposed to play for hundreds or thousands of hours. Btw Diablo 2 would've been infinitely better with level scaling in place but go stroke your cock to the nostalgia of running Baal a thousand times over because you had nothing else to do you room temp IQ boomer nerds.

Enjoying how this thread is outing all the retards who have no clue what makes ARPG:s good.

Level scaling removes any identity of the content by homogenising it across the board. It also has negative side effects on itemisation and progression. Two out of three key pillars of an ARPG, third being deep character customisation (builds).

And these takes on D2… pretty sure nobody is asking for a 20 year old endgame. It is about the concepts that made D2 good being carried over and refined upon. I actually think Diablo 4 (and 3) had the right idea in trying to move away from spamming singular abilities like Blizz sorc or Zealadin but the execution turned into a MMO-like skill rotation with cooldowns. Doesn’t help that in D3 skill trees were non-existent and in D4 way too simplistic.

If you are looking for a shallow, arcadey ARPG then D4 is for you. Saying it is deeper than D3 is like saying a swimming pool is deeper than a puddle.

 

[Reinhardt]

but remember, people - codex is very prestigious place with very monocled tastes in games.

 

[abija]

Playing 0.00000001% of the content for thousands of hours because the rest of it is full of identity but completely irrelevant is the true hart of diablo clones. (arpg doesn't fucking apply to a clicker regardless of how many times words like action and tactical are sprinkled on pr texts)

 

[Saravan]

Playing 0.00000001% of the content for thousands of hours because the rest of it is full of identity but completely irrelevant is the true hart of diablo clones. (arpg doesn't fucking apply to a clicker regardless of how many times words like action and tactical are sprinkled on pr texts)

PoE relies upon different avenues for end game whether that be mapping, delving etc.

D2R introduced terrorized zones to increase replayability of old areas without enforcing immediate level scaling from start. Many solutions to this problem besides the very lazy approach by D4.

 

[BlackAdderBG]

Nope, no concept of enemy level. Their number of affixes was based on your level for example.
Feel free to provide a list of level ranges for the 3 campaigns per zone, maybe I'm wrong. In inferno they were split symbolically by acts 61, 62, 63.

I think you either don't understand what level scaling mean or you have different explanation. When I talk about level scaling it is in regard to the player level e.g. a monster level/power/state (whatever the game devs call it) changes not according to a set parameters set beforehand by the difficulty, but by the player's level/power/whatever. I think the technical term they use is Dynamic level scaling. You technically have scaling in all ARPGs where there is difficulty levels, because you are scaling a normal monster's stats to that game's difficulty curve (been map levels in PoE, area level in D2 or world difficulty in vanilla D3), but when you enter a zone when you are level 10 it will have the same scaling if you entered it at level 40.

 

[ArchAngel]

Should I play Diablo 4, yes or no?

If you're serious about ARPGs I would say no. There isn't a lot of meat on the bone and the game needs loads of balance patches just to feel right. People on the fence should wait a few months IMO.

If you're a casual/newcomer to ARPGs you might have a decent time playing through the campaign once.

I am not a casual or newcomer and I'm having a blast.

But you are a retard that thinks zir is not a casual

 

[ArchAngel]

To be clear, everyone who's bitching about this game supposedly being shit has already paid their seventy shekels for it. You must have, because it's an online-only game that hasn't been cracked.

Either that, or you have no personal experience to validate your negativity. Pick your poison.

Or we played it for 20+ hours during multiple beta weekends and release version is not much different based on many comments and reviews on the net

 

[Fedora Master]

Should I play Diablo 4, yes or no?

If you're serious about ARPGs I would say no. There isn't a lot of meat on the bone and the game needs loads of balance patches just to feel right. People on the fence should wait a few months IMO.

If you're a casual/newcomer to ARPGs you might have a decent time playing through the campaign once.

I am not a casual or newcomer and I'm having a blast.

Are the kittens still alive.

 

[spectre]

Classic Codex thread, 75% bitching about the game they don't even play.

Should I play Diablo 4, yes or no?

Totally. Join us in celebrating that we're finally being included by playing the druid class.

 

[Cat Dude]

Mobile Legend introduced me to Diablo franchise

 

[KIss My Ass]

Classic Codex thread, 75% bitching about the game they don't even play.

bu bu but they played the weekend beta. They are paragons of D4 knowledge and the utmost authority when discussing it's quality. Those of us who have been playing it for weeks don't know shit.

 

[abija]

PoE relies upon different avenues for end game whether that be mapping, delving etc.

Yes, and there's no identity there, monsters are scaled to whatever is put in the map generator.

D2R introduced terrorized zones to increase replayability of old areas without enforcing immediate level scaling from start. Many solutions to this problem besides the very lazy approach by D4.

That's not a solution, that's mental gimnastycs on your part. Scaling being good or bad according to whatever arbitrary rules you set
Case in point, appreciating that forced bullshit content that they also put in D4 endgame. How's that identity trigger feeling if you go at lvl 10, 20, 30 in same normal terrozone and get monsters based on your level?

I think you either don't understand what level scaling mean or you have different explanation. When I talk about level scaling it is in regard to the player level e.g. a monster level/power/state (whatever the game devs call it) changes not according to a set parameters set beforehand by the difficulty, but by the player's level/power/whatever. I think the technical term they use is Dynamic level scaling. You technically have scaling in all ARPGs where there is difficulty levels, because you are scaling a normal monster's stats to that game's difficulty curve (been map levels in PoE, area level in D2 or world difficulty in vanilla D3), but when you enter a zone when you are level 10 it will have the same scaling if you entered it at level 40.

There's no misunderstanding. In d3 vanilla campaign you didn't have the zones set to a level like in PoE, you had a linear campaign where monster scaled to your level if you were in that difficulty's range (1-30, 30-50, 50-60? maybe, don't remember exactly). Inferno had special scaling of 61 act1, 62 act2, 63 act3+4 with very high differences each lvl.

The whole genre uses that for a while now. They usually have linear campaigns though, so they can use some presets there. D4 wanted "open world" and gives you more freedom in what you do for first part of leveling. (D3 did linear campaign with level scaling but apparently if some youtube celebrity doesn't QQ about it, it goes unnoticed).
At the end it's personal preference (linear + static levels vs open + scaling) and barely makes any difference in the overall quality of the game (unless you are some autistic "MUH D2" fucktard). D4 has issues atm with the end game content, that's the big deal.

 

[Saravan]

PoE relies upon different avenues for end game whether that be mapping, delving etc.

Yes, and there's no identity there, monsters are scaled to whatever is put in the map generator.

D2R introduced terrorized zones to increase replayability of old areas without enforcing immediate level scaling from start. Many solutions to this problem besides the very lazy approach by D4.

That's not a solution, that's mental gimnastycs on your part. Scaling being good or bad but whatever arbitrary rules you set
Case in point, appreciating that forced bullshit content that they also put in D4 endgame. How's that identity trigger feeling if you go at lvl 10, 20, 30 in same normal terrozone and get monsters based on your level?

Both PoE's and D2R's solutions mean that you can preserve the identity of different acts in campaign (and the mobs tied to these areas) while still being able to scale old content / tilesets during the end game stage. This is achieved without dynamic scaling from start which causes tons of issues to itemisation and progression (this part you truly are incapable of understanding). If it wasn't for a huge message popping up that you are in a different act in D4 you wouldn't even know it because it's all homogenised garbage in a 'open world' with like 3 barely different biomes.