Diablo® III

Can you play w/ Followers in Multiplayer

85 Human Priest
5510
Someone posted on another thread of mine that followers are for single player games?

So no groups of people w/ followers out?

Hope someone can confirm this, I was planning a 2 player 2 follower group.

Disc
Reply Quote
85 Goblin Warlock
7670
I really hope that is not the case... It's like leaving your dog at home that you raised from a puppy. Poor followers :(
Reply Quote
That's correct. At least in the Beta, if you're playing with other players, your follower is not available to play with.
Reply Quote
lets get a real answer. Come release is the plan to have followers during multiplayer runs?
Reply Quote
11/17/2011 09:45 AMPosted by Zipter
lets get a real answer. Come release is the plan to have followers during multiplayer runs?


Here's the real answer:

http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?sid=3000&topicId=27808220763&forumId=12007&postId=278054182636#11

That was Bashiok talking back in May about the Followers. Since the latest beta patch confirms it, there is no reason to believe it'll be changed. Followers are single player only.
Reply Quote
Well that is a fail. At least in SWTOR you can have your companion about until your group fills up.

The same goes for most MMO's (Yes I know is not tech a MMO) with companions / followers / mercs.

ie. DDO
Edited by Forte on 11/17/2011 10:10 AM PST
Reply Quote
I agree with Blizzard's reasoning, hope they stay single player only.
Reply Quote
85 Troll Shaman
4350
At least in SWTOR you can have your companion about until your group fills up.

The same goes for most MMO's (Yes I know is not tech a MMO) with companions / followers / mercs.

ie. DDO


It would be nice if they would still let you have your followers for a 2-player game. So if it was just you and a friend playing, you could both have followers out.
Edited by Basileus on 11/17/2011 7:59 PM PST
Reply Quote
86 Human Paladin
8400
I'm disappointed to hear about this. I hate having a companion in single player and then having to leave him at home while I go online.
Reply Quote
- Diablo III
87 Human Rogue
7720
I'm glad followers aren't allowed in multiplayer, I'm actually a little pissed they're even allowed playing solo past normal. Blizzard has stated time and time again that normal difficulty is used to introduce people to the game/mechanics and teach them how to play. The only benefit a follower has to this game at all is to add a little more customization to game play by choosing your follower and his/her gear.

I want my character to feel powerful and getting help from a non controlable npc is not helping. If they wanted to add another layer of customization they could have thought of a lot better options, or hell even taken the easier route and created 1 or 2 more equipment slots for our own characters (trinkets etc.).

The way things are right now if we want to play solo we will have to use a follower in order to not feel gimped, especially for the min/maxer. The only way to avoid this is to give a buff to a character with no follower active but even this would be hard to balance and for a min/maxer would always sway to 1 side as the "best". Is content going to be balanced around using a follower or not using a follower?

I remember seeing posts about how they were using followers as a way to introduce people who play solo to the mulitplayer experience. Why couldn't they have done this by making a couple quests where you have a follower helping you (pretty sure this is already in).

I wish they had of taken the time from developing the follower system and put those resources elsewhere. Adding a system to the game which provides no added fun but is rather important to players for the sake of min/maxing is awful (for other WoW players think Archaeology..shudder)

People will probably flame me for posting my thoughts, telling me to just play solo without a follower. Diablo games have long been a min/maxer's paradise and pigeon holing them into using the follower system is rather annoying and won't be fun for many at all.
Edited by Monstrum on 11/22/2011 1:49 PM PST
Reply Quote
11/22/2011 01:04 PMPosted by Monstrum
I want my character to feel powerful and getting help from a non controlable npc is not helping


Who is putting a gun to your head and making you use a follower? If you wanna be big and badass then don't use one. Yes I read your entire post and think it's a load of crap honestly.

Did you really play D2 for any amount of time? I can't imagine playing my bliz sorc without an act 2 merc. Made the game much more fun for me. Now that they have skills in D3 it will be even better. You are looking at followers in a very negative way, and I'm really not sure why. Followers should be looked at as an extension of your character. You not only get to choose your follower, but also the skills the follower has at it's disposal. You can pick a follower that best fits with the class/style you're playing to help you through the content. If you find it annoying to have them around, don't use them. You are complaining that they won't be fun and will be annoying, and you also complain about how you will need to use them because they are useful and will help you. How in this case is useful not fun? If a follower helps keep me alive, I consider that fun.

11/22/2011 01:04 PMPosted by Monstrum
Adding a system to the game which provides no added fun but is rather important to players for the sake of min/maxing is awful


What things in the game that affect your character don't lead to min/maxing? Isn't this how RPGs work? You find the best stats for your build and stack them. Kinda the point of the game...

Back in classic D2 when followers didn't follow between acts, who used them? I don't remember using them, because it wasn't fun. Once they changed them to stay with your character and could use gear, everyone used them. I have NEVER seen somebody complain about having to use D2 followers ever and I've played D2 since its release. D3's followers can't even die... don't require gold to bring back to life. What more could you freaking want?

When I bring my wizard into a game with 3 other random people, who all happen to be wizards, and I'm built around having a templar to tank mobs for me, how am I supposed to play without my follower? How do I know the other wizards have a spell to slow targets, or even have frost nova? Can I trust these people in hell or inferno? Hell no. Oh you say to go to town and respec? What happens to my runes in my skills? We don't know anything about this yet. All I'm saying is that the game can change a lot by having a follower in solo play, and then taking it away in multiplayer and I am strongly against this. By allowing followers in multiplayer, gameplay stays the same for each individual player between solo and multiplayer, which is the way it should be. I worry about this from a HC player's viewpoint.

Blizzard has talked about the player/follower interaction in the game and it seems kinda cool to me. You say it won't be fun to have a follower? You don't seem to have very good reasons for this. If it were up to me they'd be in multiplayer. If difficulty has to be scaled for 4 player groups that's fine. I'd rather use and see the work they put in the game while playing with friends instead of limiting it for solo play only.

Reply Quote
The concept behind the Followers system is to push people to play cooperatively over Battle.net with other players. So those that want to play alone can do so with a little coop experience as well... And then once they realize there are benefits to playing with another "player," they'll be enticed into playing with friends or what have you.
________________________________________________
The Chat Gem Lives!
Diablo III Analyst for Pro Team Evil Geniuses
Fansite Administrator of SC2Mapster and SC2Replayed
Edited by Sixen on 11/22/2011 9:39 PM PST
Reply Quote
11/22/2011 09:39 PMPosted by Sixen
The concept behind the Followers system is to push people to play cooperatively over Battle.net with other players. So those that want to play alone can do so with a little coop experience as well... And then once they realize there are benefits to playing with another "player," they'll be enticed into playing with friends or what have you.


I understand what you have said but it's completely stupid that blizzard thinks like this and I stated why in my post. I don't agree with changing gameplay and mechanics from solo to multiplayer. I am a HC player and I have been since a few months after D2 release. I'm not risking my character's life by playing with stupid, unreliable players. You can argue about players being stupid, but the fact is, they are, and most don't care about other people. The amount of players who pk and leech off of others in D2 says it all. You want your character's life in the hands of these people? At least let us have a reliable merc by our side.

Actually Sixen, you are making my point from my post above... Blizzard is pushing people to play co-op and then taking content away when they play co-op. They take away skills by taking away the follower that a player can base their spec around. If I'm a wizard with a templar follower I may take less defensive skills because I have a tank. Then when I'm playing with other players I may not have a tank anymore. Sounds like a poor system to me.

The fact is I'm willing to bet if we don't have followers in multiplayer at release (which looks like this is the case) it will be added in an expansion just like mercs were changed in D2 to follow players between acts in later content.

Multiplayer: There are skills the followers have that will only affect the player who owns the follower. Let that player see spell affects from their follower only, or an option for this in the game to reduce spell affects that could cause clutter and confusion if there's too much going on on the screen.

I'd like a real solid reason for not allowing followers in multiplayer. Haven't seen it yet.
Edited by ZergMcNugget on 11/23/2011 4:38 AM PST
Reply Quote
- Diablo III
87 Human Rogue
7720
You may have read my post but you missed my point entirely. There are two types of players; players that like followers and players that don't like followers. Your suggestion is for the players that don't like them to just not use one, but why should they be gimped when doing so? The way it is right now players that care about min/maxing, which you already stated should be anyone that plays RPGS, are forced to pick up a follower. Not everyone enjoys playing pet classes in games which is essentially what they are making all D3 classes into. I dislike the necro in D2 and I extremely hate the hunter class in WoW simply because managing a pet is not fun. At least these are just classes in both games and I could choose to not play them, but giving pets to all of the classes in D3 is just meh.

So you are a player that likes followers, and I'm a player that dislikes them. Why should your character have the advantage and more power in game. Why can't we both be equal?
Can't Blizzard implement something that either buffs the player who doesn't choose to use a follower or instead make the mobs harder for the people that do choose to use one?

Followers should have stayed as an introduction to the multiplayer experience and nothing more, or just not provide an advantage to people that do wish to use one.

To answer your question about playing D2, I've been playing the Diablo series since D1 was in it's prime and logged many years playing D2 and still do.
Reply Quote
- Diablo III
87 Human Rogue
7720
The concept behind the Followers system is to push people to play cooperatively over Battle.net with other players. So those that want to play alone can do so with a little coop experience as well... And then once they realize there are benefits to playing with another "player," they'll be enticed into playing with friends or what have you.


This is exactly what I'm referring to Sixen. Normal mode was stated to be the learning period for the game and will be a great time to introduce multiplayer to players that may not be familiar with the concept. Once the player is out of normal difficulty why is the follower still used? The player by now can decide if they'd either like to play solo or join a multiplayer game. This whole introduction to the multiplayer concept could have been done entirely through quests instead.

My argument isn't trying to say the follower system is trash, many people love the idea and will really enjoy using it. However, many people do not like followers and giving them only the choice between gimping/not gimping their characters was a very bad way to implement the system.
Edited by Monstrum on 11/23/2011 7:58 AM PST
Reply Quote
Zerg, we see what your concern is, but it seems like you think a little too highly of the followers.
The followers will be viable past normal difficulty, but that's all. They are viable, but will not be optimal enough to fully replace a human player.

I actually don't think you'll be missing too much if you don't use one, otherwise Blizzard would've made them mandatory from the beginning. Like you said, there's a reason why Blizzard is pushing people to co-op instead of let them continue rely on a content that's optimized for normal difficulty. Also, I suggest that you should spec a follower based around your character's build, not the other way around.

Yes, there will be stupid players, but I don't think the followers/AI will ever be comparable with the human players. Then again, I wouldn't really trust any of them (both human and AI) in a game like diablo, especially if I'm playing a hardcore character.

What I want to say is that you shouldn't put too much expectations on the followers, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed later in the game...
Edited by Nemesis on 11/23/2011 3:47 PM PST
Reply Quote
I'm all for buffing monsters if there's followers, it's another player, kinda. I'd be fine with that. I never liked the hunter in WoW either, or the warlock for that matter because I hated controlling a pet, but followers have absolutely nothing to control. Neither did D2 mercs other than you could use teleport to move them around.

I'm not missing your point Monstrum, I just think it's rediculous, sorry. I will never see it the way you do. We'll agree to disagree.

Yes, there will be stupid players, but I don't think the followers/AI will ever be comparable with the human players. Then again, I wouldn't really trust any of them in a game like diablo, especially if I'm playing a hardcore character. What I want to say is that you shouldn't put too much expectation on the followers, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed later in the game...


I put expectations on the followers because they actually have skills now and seem to be much more useful than the D2 mercs who came with an aura at best. Will I be disappointed in later game content? Maybe. D2 mercs were complete trash until you geared them as well. They couldn't survive in Hell unless you had some gear on them.

I will take a follower over a random player any day of the week. At least I know what skills they have and I know what the follower will do. It's predictable, which to me is a good quality.

Maybe it just comes down to how much I hate most people who play these games. When I started a new season with a HC char in D2, I always solo'd up through Hell and never played in groups until I was strong enough because I never trusted anybody. Maybe D3 will be different.
Reply Quote
I don't see why this is such a big deal to people. Diablo 3 is about the freedom to play as you want. If I want to play with my Demon Hunter friend and hide behind Kormac while we demolish things, its our choice, and unlike an MMO affects nobody else, as my friend and I will in our own passworded game.

It would be silly for Blizzard to expect its okay that people are going to tailor their characters around having their followers, only to hop on MP to play with friends and no follower. Now all of a sudden, Kormac arbitrarily disappears and I'm forced to change my character's spells and runes?

But friends we've known for years and random online people are two different things. I trust an AI that's designed to use taunt and heal me when I fall below half over some random player any day. I've seen from experience that a player is more likely to just kill things and get you back up AFTER things are dead and he's taken all the exp and loot for him/herself.
Reply Quote
I actually agree with what Ryu said.
I met lots of unfriendly and untrustworthy ppl in D2 battlenet.
The game community actually shows all negative feats of humanity.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]