Diablo 3 Discussion Thread

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,299
It sounds like they spend a couple weeks playing Diablo 2 + LoD and got some "ideas" about how to better balance D3. Not a bad sign.

Yea, or they caught their developers using orbs of chance on Paula rings trying to get a Doedre's Damning for their curse spec.
 

LeninGHOLA

Vladimir Hayt
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
18,416
Its definitely better but your still grinding the same areas. They REALLY need to release an xpack with more levels...

Some extremely randomized instances would help, too. Maybe some side quests that take a long time to accomplish.
 

stevedave

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
5,737
Expack that that adds all the maps from D2 would be pretty righteous.....get a real bonus level with cows in it instead of what ever they hell they call that my little pony thing.
 

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,299
Expack that that adds all the maps from D2 would be pretty righteous.....get a real bonus level with cows in it instead of what ever they hell they call that my little pony thing.

The fact that Whimsywhatever is in the game in its silly state doesn't really bug me. I thought it was cool that you had to craft up the staff and shit... but then to have there be nothing at all in there worth a damn... that's the problem with d3 in general. There needs to be something in there that i can't get elsewhere. Doesn't even have to be a drop. It could be something like 10x the monster density, or... just something.
 

Aix.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
1,959
It sounds like they spend a couple weeks playing Diablo 2 + LoD and got some "ideas" about how to better balance D3. Not a bad sign.

It's funny because that blog entry is basically the devs admitting that the AH/RMAH wrecked the game and that they shouldn't have had such disdain for all of the winning designs from Diablo 2 when designing its sequel - what a concept! The real reason for this, I suspect, is that Blizz was never trying to make a Diablo game for Diablo fans; they wanted a Diablo game they could sell to WoW fans, regardless of how popular the Diablo series had been on its own.

The D2-addict part of me will always secretly wish that this game will somehow turn into the game it quite easily could and should have been, but it's really not in the cards. These guys think ARPG character customization is "ways to make your character look different" and don't seem to understand that Wizards/WDs/Barbs/Monks all running around with the same damned weapons/armors is a problem. They didn't like D2's attribute points system: that's fine - but they still haven't figured out that they should probably replace it with something. It's not surprising that this shallow design vision has produced a shallow game.

10 months after release and they're only now coming up with things like "a Wizard Orb that allowed for two Hydras to be active at once"? Who was even working on this thing for the past 4+ years? Is the idea good? Yes. Could any D2 fan have come up with that idea with 5 minutes of brainstorming 10 years ago? Yes. WHAT. THE. FUCK.

I believe the heart of the issue is that, while they might want to make a Diablo game for Diablo fans now, their hands are still tied because of the WoW/casual/console influences from the pre-release *ahem* "development stage", and so it's half-measures or bust from here on out. The things that really need to change aren't going to change, and those are the things that affect longevity, replayability, and depth the most.
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
You are forgetting one important thing Aix. The game is finally reaching it's first real launch as it is coming to a console near you. If Blizzard sold 6 millioin copies to the PC crowd, imagine what they can sell to the console owners! This means that Blizzard will get a "do over" as far as making a fun, exhilarating game that appeals to legions of new fans that honestly are probably too young to know what the acronym for D1 or D2 is without consulting Wikipedia. So as long as they get the "rebirth" launch correct everything will be fine. Many D3 PC owners will probably buy the game a second time just to be able to play offline also.

Forget that D3 on PC exists for a moment in time and think about what I just said. It's a brand new launch for Blizzard of a brand new IP. PC users getting benefits from the console launch is icing on the cake as our ship has launched and sailed away long ago. Everyone should be grateful that they got this level of development help, and really wonder what ideas they have in store for an expansion pack later on.

That's the only way I perceive Blizzard making enough money to keep the development cycle alive for D3 on the PC. Unless the RMAH is feeding them tons of cash, which it may just be doing still.
 

Plague_Injected

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
6,621
It's funny because that blog entry is basically the devs admitting that the AH/RMAH wrecked the game and that they shouldn't have had such disdain for all of the winning designs from Diablo 2 when designing its sequel - what a concept! The real reason for this, I suspect, is that Blizz was never trying to make a Diablo game for Diablo fans; they wanted a Diablo game they could sell to WoW fans, regardless of how popular the Diablo series had been on its own.

The D2-addict part of me will always secretly wish that this game will somehow turn into the game it quite easily could and should have been, but it's really not in the cards. These guys think ARPG character customization is "ways to make your character look different" and don't seem to understand that Wizards/WDs/Barbs/Monks all running around with the same damned weapons/armors is a problem. They didn't like D2's attribute points system: that's fine - but they still haven't figured out that they should probably replace it with something. It's not surprising that this shallow design vision has produced a shallow game.

10 months after release and they're only now coming up with things like "a Wizard Orb that allowed for two Hydras to be active at once"? Who was even working on this thing for the past 4+ years? Is the idea good? Yes. Could any D2 fan have come up with that idea with 5 minutes of brainstorming 10 years ago? Yes. WHAT. THE. FUCK.

I believe the heart of the issue is that, while they might want to make a Diablo game for Diablo fans now, their hands are still tied because of the WoW/casual/console influences from the pre-release *ahem* "development stage", and so it's half-measures or bust from here on out. The things that really need to change aren't going to change, and those are the things that affect longevity, replayability, and depth the most.

The game that was unveiled in 2008 was very different from the thing that got kicked out the door in 2012 after it had turned necrotic from RMAH Cancer.
 

TheCommander

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 2, 2003
Messages
2,999
Maybe after fixing the items, they will make it a proper Diablo game and add a skill tree.

Part of the problem is also the boring items in D3. It was cool finding runes and uniques in D2. The uniques in D2 had some character and coolness to them as well.
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
The crowd they are catering to now don't want a skill tree. They want instant gratification. So the current system is perfection in their eyes. As long as it sells who am I to argue. :)
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
I think it was 12 million sales :x

Yea, but that's not a reason to support the game like they are doing. They are supporting the game so that they can sell the proper game to the console crowd where patches cost you tons of money. The next opportunity to make money on the PC comes with an expansion that I personally won't be getting. Nor any of the members of my gaming clan whom all bought the base game at launch. To be exact unless Blizzard sticks a pet with it for my old WoW buddies. they won't purchase it either. If it has a pet or mount in it they will definitely buy it though and never install it like they did D3. I wonder how many other people feel the same way.
 
D

Deleted member 174368

Guest
Yea, but that's not a reason to support the game like they are doing. They are supporting the game so that they can sell the proper game to the console crowd where patches cost you tons of money. The next opportunity to make money on the PC comes with an expansion that I personally won't be getting. Nor any of the members of my gaming clan whom all bought the base game at launch. To be exact unless Blizzard sticks a pet with it for my old WoW buddies. they won't purchase it either. If it has a pet or mount in it they will definitely buy it though and never install it like they did D3. I wonder how many other people feel the same way.

They support the game well because that's what Blizzard does. StarCraft 2 isn't going to be released on consoles and gets patched frequently, even 2 years after release.
 

LeninGHOLA

Vladimir Hayt
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
18,416
I don't think they will get half the sales with their console version. With no RMAH and fewer sales, I highly doubt the console version is their main focus.
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
They support the game well because that's what Blizzard does. StarCraft 2 isn't going to be released on consoles and gets patched frequently, even 2 years after release.

E Sports balance patches and future expansion sales because of E Sports fame makes them work on SC2. WoW has a sub fee and E Sports attachment. I can't think of a title that Blizzard is actively supporting today that doesn't have a tournament or subscription fee tie in to generate cash. Maybe you can. :)
 

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,299
I honestly don't care what they do. I won't be buying their expansion unless they make huge changes to the game.

"We're also considering making a guaranteed legendary drop from bosses the first time you kill them" just proves they still don't get it.

We've all known that they made this game for the wow/console crowd. I'm curious to see how it goes, and am still pretty stupified that they're getting offline play. With no RMAH either, they'll probably have good drops in their single player game.

rabble rabble *shakes fist at blizz*
 

stevedave

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
5,737
I have over 1000 hours in D3. I can complain about a lot of thing about the game. But in the end I have over 1000 hours in the game.


Safe to say I'll be buying the expansion pack, regardless of how good or bad it is.


But I'm not sure if I'm even going to play the game again until then.....So many good games have come out in the past month and I just went premium in BF3.
 
D

Deleted member 174368

Guest
E Sports balance patches and future expansion sales because of E Sports fame makes them work on SC2. WoW has a sub fee and E Sports attachment. I can't think of a title that Blizzard is actively supporting today that doesn't have a tournament or subscription fee tie in to generate cash. Maybe you can. :)

Diablo 2 was patched 10 years after its initial release.

And I don't know why you're trying to find excuses as to why a developer would patch a game. They're a business, their primary focus is to make money. I know some people like to think that's a horrible thing to do these days, but if a new patch is economically viable for them while also improving the experience for people that already own the game, then what is the problem? Who cares why they support the game?
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
Oh man SteveDave I just stopped playing BF3 cold turkey. That's what my buddies all flocked to after D3 didn't pan out so well at launch. BF3 is pretty fun though. Did you get one of those deals on Premium?
 

LeninGHOLA

Vladimir Hayt
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
18,416
Diablo 2 was patched 10 years after its initial release.

And I don't know why you're trying to find excuses as to why a developer would patch a game. They're a business, their primary focus is to make money. I know some people like to think that's a horrible thing to do these days, but if a new patch is economically viable for them while also improving the experience for people that already own the game, then what is the problem? Who cares why they support the game?

Continued patching with D2 helped sales. People are still buying D2 battlechests.
 

stevedave

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
5,737
Oh man SteveDave I just stopped playing BF3 cold turkey. That's what my buddies all flocked to after D3 didn't pan out so well at launch. BF3 is pretty fun though. Did you get one of those deals on Premium?

Yep that's what made me bite on the premium. I was on an 8 month break from the game pretty much since D3 launched. Great game under the right circumstances....bad team can infuriate quite quickly.
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
Diablo 2 was patched 10 years after its initial release.

And I don't know why you're trying to find excuses as to why a developer would patch a game. They're a business, their primary focus is to make money. I know some people like to think that's a horrible thing to do these days, but if a new patch is economically viable for them while also improving the experience for people that already own the game, then what is the problem? Who cares why they support the game?

I'm just saying that the new Blizzard is nothing like the old Blizzard. Old Blizzard did things differently and I absolutely loved everything they did as if it was a religion. Activision made them realize earning potential > fan base as long as you appease the lowest common denominator. Which in this case is casuals as there are a lot more of them than hardcore players. But it alienated tons of their old fans. Of course they picked up tons of new fans so it all worked out for them in the end.

Not talking trash about anyone that enjoys Blizzard games as there is a small hardcore element to all of them if you search hard enough. Which is cool with me. I just lowered my expectations of their development team by 75%. Of course my friends absolutely despise Blizzard now as a corporation. And in all honesty I play whatever games that we as a group pick to play. BF3 is the only thing that we've as a group been able to agree on. Well vanilla BF3 as one guy is a cheapskate. And yes, he frequents this forum and I hope he reads this as I want to ride my darn bike! Buy some Premium man!
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
Continued patching with D2 helped sales. People are still buying D2 battlechests.

Yes, but I bet if they added those maps, skill trees, etc from D2 to D3 then people would buy the $60 version instead of the discounted 10 y.o. battlechest. :) Just saying! And it kinda proves my point that people want a connection to old Blizzard instead of super casual Blizzard. What's next? Facebook Diablo?
 

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,299
And I don't know why you're trying to find excuses as to why a developer would patch a game. They're a business, their primary focus is to make money. I know some people like to think that's a horrible thing to do these days, but if a new patch is economically viable for them while also improving the experience for people that already own the game, then what is the problem? Who cares why they support the game?

Because... before business majors and accountants ended up making all the decisions in the game industry, development studios attempted to make good games and support them as that is what generated sales and support of their name. Similar with supporting modding. They knew that if they got a community into modding their game, it would see a long life and even more sales.

Now with gaming being mainstream, business majors have realized all they need is marketing to sell games. So they can look at their spreadsheets and see all the various ways they can cut spending which won't actually affect their sales.

It's just a disgusting shift.
 

LeninGHOLA

Vladimir Hayt
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
18,416
Because... before business majors and accountants ended up making all the decisions in the game industry, development studios attempted to make good games and support them as that is what generated sales and support of their name. Similar with supporting modding. They knew that if they got a community into modding their game, it would see a long life and even more sales.

Now with gaming being mainstream, business majors have realized all they need is marketing to sell games. So they can look at their spreadsheets and see all the various ways they can cut spending which won't actually affect their sales.

It's just a disgusting shift.

Path of Exile has zero mod support and a ban policy in place. That said, they did hire Brother Laz to help with the game.
 

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,299
Path of Exile has zero mod support and a ban policy in place. That said, they did hire Brother Laz to help with the game.

I was just using that as an example of something which game companies spent money doing, which didn't net them an instant income of monies, but did over the long haul in addition to garnering favor in their customer's minds.
 

LeninGHOLA

Vladimir Hayt
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
18,416
I was just using that as an example of something which game companies spent money doing, which didn't net them an instant income of monies, but did over the long haul in addition to garnering favor in their customer's minds.

Yep. It's a big selling point for Bethesda games, for sure. I've also come back to D2 several times over the years just to see a new version of Median XL.
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
I agree with what you guys are saying 100%. Chockomonkey is spot on and yes, Leninghola, Brother Laz is the equivalent of GGG allowing mod support. I would even say that when he was added to the team that the game became much better because of his insight. Modders are truly great assets to companies. DOTA2 is another example of a modder brought in to make what he envisions as great. I think in many cases modders are more passionate about the title than the original developer, as the mod is their big chance to show the world their artistic prowess. Same thing as Big_Aug being excited about his stature in D3 hardcore ranking. Same passion but over a longer period of time as a mod may never be complete.

AceCR42 I wasn't saying that patching a game is a bad thing. I still think the motivation for patching D3 is less about generating good will for the PC gamers that suffered through the launch, and more about getting the console version into a better playable state as console patches cost a lot more than to deploy than PC patching. XBOX Live charges a 40k fee to patch your game from what I understand. So it makes sense to experiment on the PC title so you can sell more console copies and patch less. Companies are becoming more minimalist to save pennies nowadays. Just a fact of life.
 

big_aug

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
2,183
There is just more money to be made in games that sell to lots of people. It sucks for us and makes us angry. We argue and debate on forums. At the end of the day, we are a small minority. Publicly traded companies have a legal obligation to shareholders to make as much money as possible. That's just the way it goes.

I think the problem is that we invest too much of ourselves into these games. We expect so much more than simply being entertained. A game like Diablo 3 basically has to be the best game ever created up to that point or it will be seen as a failure.

I put over 1000 hours into D3. I put maybe 10% of that time into Path of Exile before I gave up on it. D3 was definitely more "polished" and playable. Path of Exile definitely had a more interesting skill and currency system. Both were fun. I paid $60 for Diablo 3 and invested $20 into Path of Exile for some stash tabs. I absolutely got my money's worth out of both of them (especially considering I sold my D3 account for $500 :D).

Are they both good games? I think so. Are we going to be playing either of them 5 years from now? I doubt it. I know I won't be picking up D3 ever again, even for an expansion. I might try PoE again if they ever make some changes I'd like to see. I don't know if I would even if they did. I never really got that excited feeling for drops or that rush when I almost died in HC (and I didn't really care when I died to be honest) like I did in D2/D3. Neither game has that draw that had me reinstalling D2 over and over again over the span of many years. Those types of games are few and far between. That doesn't mean the games are bad though.
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
I agreee with you also Big_Aug, but consider this. Game companies are folding like card tables during a police raid. The economy is coming around slowly but surely and they are still going under. Why are these companies budgeting their livelihoods into marketing instead of game play? Because the investors like shiny things that they can hold and see. They can't understand the code that goes into a game. Just copy and paste it like CoD.

I'm not saying that Blizzard has fallen as low as their bedfellows. But if they keep following them it's going to rub off on them more and more as their companies become more intertwined. I think sharegoldiggers are the bane of public companies. I'd hate to see Gabe Newell trying to explain to a shareholder that the guy he just hired 6 months ago is going to run this meeting as he is as trusted as the founder of the company. Just not going to happen.
 

XvMMvX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,665
There is just more money to be made in games that sell to lots of people. It sucks for us and makes us angry. We argue and debate on forums. At the end of the day, we are a small minority. Publicly traded companies have a legal obligation to shareholders to make as much money as possible. That's just the way it goes.

I think the problem is that we invest too much of ourselves into these games. We expect so much more than simply being entertained. A game like Diablo 3 basically has to be the best game ever created up to that point or it will be seen as a failure.

I put over 1000 hours into D3. I put maybe 10% of that time into Path of Exile before I gave up on it. D3 was definitely more "polished" and playable. Path of Exile definitely had a more interesting skill and currency system. Both were fun. I paid $60 for Diablo 3 and invested $20 into Path of Exile for some stash tabs. I absolutely got my money's worth out of both of them (especially considering I sold my D3 account for $500 ).

Are they both good games? I think so. Are we going to be playing either of them 5 years from now? I doubt it. I know I won't be picking up D3 ever again, even for an expansion. I might try PoE again if they ever make some changes I'd like to see. I don't know if I would even if they did. I never really got that excited feeling for drops or that rush when I almost died in HC (and I didn't really care when I died to be honest) like I did in D2/D3. Neither game has that draw that had me reinstalling D2 over and over again over the span of many years. Those types of games are few and far between. That doesn't mean the games are bad though.

Well fucking said. I know this is on the D3 thread, but this could be applied to a lot of the PC vs Console, or the game sucks arguments on here.

People invest and expect way to much with every game release, and do not realize how much money goes into these games. Your sacred indy developer doesn't start out to make a feel good game. They want to create an IP to swells to big money or get bought out for big money.
 

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
21,354
What you're saying XvMMvX is very true but consumers aren't buying everything that comes out of the shareholder factories. Consumers are skipping big name games and buying Indie at an alarming rate for the game factories. People are losing jobs in the game industry not because the marketing budget wasn't good enough; it's because enough consumers are skipping their title altogether. They simply don't want everything bland off the treadmill. For every CoD there are 100 titles with big budgets that don't cut the mustard.

Crysis 3 is a perfect example of this. Yerli is mulling why people are skipping his game and saying that consumers are experiencing some type of console fatigue, when the real reason that my gaming clan skipped it was because we didn't like Crysis 2. They blew it and we refuse to buy installment #3. Just like Blizzard blew D3 so we won't buy an expansion pack. Crysis 3 sales are probably good enough if they didn't have shareholders demanding ridiculous returns on investment. But that's fine; the market weeds out the weak. BF4 comes around and we're already excited to preorder it as BF3 wasn't a bad game.

Yes, I give Indie guys a chance with my gaming dollars. I'd rather invest $5 - $15 in a title than $60 - $80 as the experience is about the same. I remember when I wouldn't touch a title that wasn't good enough to require a $60 tag. Now I'm a better consumer. I wish I was that way when I bought SWTOR Collector's Edition or D3. Age mellows you and allows you to see the forest from the trees.
 

mope54

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,452
the main "problem" that blizzard seems to have currently are people engaging in revisionist history.

blizzard has been and will always be a casual gamer company first and foremost

it's nonsensical to compare D3 base game to Diablo and Diablo 2 post-expansions


but one thing it does clear up is who actually played those games from the beginning rather than picking up a battlechest on clearance in a Staples bin and posting on forums that they're diehard franchise fans who know all about the history claiming blizzard is shitting all over it
 

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,299
the main "problem" that blizzard seems to have currently are people engaging in revisionist history.

blizzard has been and will always be a casual gamer company first and foremost

it's nonsensical to compare D3 base game to Diablo and Diablo 2 post-expansions


but one thing it does clear up is who actually played those games from the beginning rather than picking up a battlechest on clearance in a Staples bin and posting on forums that they're diehard franchise fans who know all about the history claiming blizzard is shitting all over it

There was no casual market when Diablo was made.

And I further dispute your claim that it makes no sense to compare D3 to D2 or D1... it makes all the sense in the world. They could copy whatever they wanted because it's their own IP. They chose to take the game in a new direction. They didn't have to. All this goes back to the fact that since the merge, they chose a new direction--and that was to make games for the casual market.
 

mope54

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,452
Diablo's runes were released in the expansion

Diablo II's runes were released in the expansion

Diablo III's runes will be released in the expansion
 

chockomonkey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2003
Messages
8,299
Diablo's runes were released in the expansion

Diablo II's runes were released in the expansion

Diablo III's runes will be released in the expansion

i look at what you said and all i think is, "how after making that mistake twice already did they not learn?"

I think that earns them an extra mark for stupidity, but in your book you put it as they should get a pardon.
 

XvMMvX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,665
They could copy whatever they wanted because it's their own IP. They chose to take the game in a new direction. They didn't have to. All this goes back to the fact that since the merge, they chose a new direction--and that was to make games for the casual market.

I bolded the important part of that statement that most on here seem to ignore while in the mist of their entilement hissy fit. It is their IP to take in whatever direction that want to.

This game sold millions of copies. Many people thought it was good and still play it.

There are two major problems that I see with this installment (no it is not respecing, skill points, nor the auction house). They are itemization and what content you run. The legendary drop rate is just right; however, even when you get one to drop it will generally be worthless. Also not being able to run whatever content you want in order to get items. They are working on the content part with adding things to places in order to reward you for running it.

Will these issues cause stagnation in future sales? Only time will tell, but I think the expansion will probably sell well.

I still think an endless dungeon with a leader board would do wonders for this game. Just make it an event like a boss fight, your party wipes and thats it. Increase MF the further you get.
 
Top