Diablo® III

The Argument.. and why it doesn't fly

Jay Wilson tried to take a different direction with Diablo 3 to make it his own game, but he failed miserably.
Reply Quote
12/08/2012 11:50 PMPosted by DrK
Next some features in D2:LOD if they wanted to port them over to the new design would take a lot of work to get them right. Sure I can understand why they are liked. But it is not as easy as you think to port them over.


I had to log in just to call shenanigans on this.... How hard do you think it is to add some of these features that would add some level of depth to the game?

Let me pick an example, elemental damage. It is NOT hard to "port" over and it adds depth to the game. Choosing between say the high damage over time of poison or the randomness of things such as chain lightning. Add to this the fact that some enemies were immune to certain elements and then teamplay or character diversity in single player were both encouraged. These interesting features were completely removed and in my mind it is just an example of extreme laziness in how this game was designed.

Let me pick another, a variety of socketables. There is NO reason to reduce the number of socketables and programming a few extra gems into the game is NOT hard work, anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves. Hell even the gems we do have are boring because there is not even the illusion of choice. There is so much that could be done with socketables but again, I would say that this is another example of very lazy game design.

You know what, even if these things were hard to implement, that is still a very pathetic reason to not add features into a game, especially one that had huge budget and was in development for years and had a previous game to learn from.

Rant over, good post OP! I am sick of hearing about how making a game is so hard, and that because D3 is a new game it should not have learnt anything from what made D2:LoD work. It is seriously pathetic!


Charms, extra gems and jewels would be an inventory issue at release due to the fact it would've competed for inventory space.

Also what would jewels do for the gear that gems do not. You do not want two systems doing the same thing. That is why the talisman system, charms that were put into a special inventory of 13 1x1, were cut. That is why the mystic was cut because she as well did not add in anything special.

IMO it is lazy design to say that the only way we will challenge a player is to make an enemy immune to an damage type. There are other ways of adding in challenge that are far better than that.

I say before you say how easy or hard something is then do this. Go make or work on a game of this size and magnitude. Then you can come back and say how easy or hard it is.
Reply Quote
I see you misunderstand me. I was talking about the fact that I did not buy this game thinking it would be a perfect little copy of D2:LOD. In fact if I believed that in any way I might not have bought it until about a year or two later.

I knew that there would be no skill/stat points to spend. I knew that the talisman system was scrapped along with the Mystic and many other things that you also no doubt knew about just by reading the information on diablofans.com and the official site before this game launched. The rest of the game was unknown until I bought it and played it.

So this means that I had more than enough information to decide whether I wanted to buy this game or not. That is exactly what I am talking about and I know that many other players had the same information that I did and made their decision accordingly.


I understood that the game would be different. I, and many others, trusted Blizzard would change the game for the better. We believed them because we wanted to believe. We believed them because of their stellar track record.

However, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The hype did not match the delivered product. You are being naughty to suggest that reading a review website will give the full experience of a game. If it did, we would not need to play it, would we?

Also, official review sites are hardly known to give accurate impressions of 'end game' content. They have a go, say something nice and move on.

So this means that there was NOT enough information to go on. A photo of a pizza is not a pizza.
Reply Quote
- D2 wasn't as good until LoD came out.
- D2 didn't have all the goodies when it came out, it took LoD for that
- Why should we expect D3 to have all it's goodies upon release if D2 didn't?

Let's flip the argument around and ask this question instead: Why did the D3 dev team literally go back 12 years and in essence, re-create D2 like it was released on day 1, with the exception of them removing PvP and the majority of the loot.

Yes D2 didn't have all it's goodies right away, but the fact of the matter is, all those little core goodies that made the diablo franchise great, were sitting there for them on a silver platter yelling "add me" "add me" "they love us".

So then you have to ask yourself this: Upon making D3, why did they remove the majority of the items, the runes, charms, jewels, rune words, horadric cube, an act, a class, the randomness, the PvP, the ladder, the social system, skill diversity, build diversity, the offline mode, chat rooms, 8 player max.

Why did they not just add these to D3, then start adding in all their creative ideas on top of it? There is absolutely no excuse as to why this dev team didn't add in all the core ingredients that were already part of the franchise.


why? is easier to copy paste than to create new features
so if they added all features D2 had the sxpansion(s) would require new features to be created which require hard work
Reply Quote
12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
Charms, extra gems and jewels would be an inventory issue at release due to the fact it would've competed for inventory space.


Charm bag: Fixed.

Call it a 'Ju Ju Bag' and then you can link it to some WD lore. There. I have done it.
Edited by LunathirEth#2368 on 12/9/2012 3:27 AM PST
Reply Quote
12/07/2012 06:16 AMPosted by Zymurgeist
It's an unnecessary argument if you like D3. D3 is a better game than D2 was in any form. Your basic assumption is based on the opinions of only the people who agree with you.


So is yours, how exactly did you add anything to the discussion with that? If you wanted to praise D3 you could have argued against his points but instead all you did was say "Well the people who disagree with you think your wrong" DUH. Then you say "D3 is a better game than D2 was in any form" Thats a huge statement to make I wonder how you will support your statement.....oh you didn't at all. No surprise there.
Edited by stryker#1589 on 12/9/2012 3:31 AM PST
Reply Quote
- D2 wasn't as good until LoD came out.
- D2 didn't have all the goodies when it came out, it took LoD for that
- Why should we expect D3 to have all it's goodies upon release if D2 didn't?

Let's flip the argument around and ask this question instead: Why did the D3 dev team literally go back 12 years and in essence, re-create D2 like it was released on day 1, with the exception of them removing PvP and the majority of the loot.

Yes D2 didn't have all it's goodies right away, but the fact of the matter is, all those little core goodies that made the diablo franchise great, were sitting there for them on a silver platter yelling "add me" "add me" "they love us".

So then you have to ask yourself this: Upon making D3, why did they remove the majority of the items, the runes, charms, jewels, rune words, horadric cube, an act, a class, the randomness, the PvP, the ladder, the social system, skill diversity, build diversity, the offline mode, chat rooms, 8 player max.

Why did they not just add these to D3, then start adding in all their creative ideas on top of it? There is absolutely no excuse as to why this dev team didn't add in all the core ingredients that were already part of the franchise.


why? is easier to copy paste than to create new features
so if they added all features D2 had the sxpansion(s) would require new features to be created which require hard work


I think you missed the point. They needed to take the core ideas and concepts....use them!, AND make them better!. That means keep runes in some form, keep charms in some form, keep the skill tree in some form.. etc etc etc They didn't do that at all they removed all of them and replaced them with.....completely different crap that didn't add anything to the game or they just didn't replace them with anything.
Reply Quote
He is a shadow, a protector of truth where he can only see and no one could see. Wore proudly on his chest, a chest plate of Athena, ready to slew any single person who he could not see with his one eye.

However he, is not singular.

There are many forms of him. Some of him choose to ignore what others expressed. Some of him twist words to suit himself. Some of him tell the whole world it is totally a waste to even argue that what you think, for it does not agree to what he think.

So many of them, so scary of them.
Reply Quote
12/09/2012 03:25 AMPosted by LunathirEth
Charms, extra gems and jewels would be an inventory issue at release due to the fact it would've competed for inventory space.


Charm bag: Fixed.

Call it a 'Ju Ju Bag' and then you can link it to some WD lore. There. I have done it.


I'm pretty sure they had charms in the game at one point and they weren't in your inventory. It was this circle thing (I forget what it was called). I was really looking forward to it, I don't know why they scrapped it, would have been nice to have something else to do.
Reply Quote
Turn that frown upside down!

:)
Reply Quote


Charm bag: Fixed.

Call it a 'Ju Ju Bag' and then you can link it to some WD lore. There. I have done it.


I'm pretty sure they had charms in the game at one point and they weren't in your inventory. It was this circle thing (I forget what it was called). I was really looking forward to it, I don't know why they scrapped it, would have been nice to have something else to do.

I bet they didn't scrap it.

I bet they developed this game far beyond it's current state, and then stripped it, so they could slowly add features back into the game, increasing profit over time. Kind of like how they keep adding !@#$ into WoW. Release an expansion pack every year and suddenly you have a player base who have spent literally 10+ years on a single account. It's my belief that this is probably why the game is so miserably broken and why they've had to spend so much time reworking most of the mechanics.

Watch charms and that "circle thing" you mentioned find it's way into an X-pack.
Edited by Montus#1499 on 12/9/2012 3:53 AM PST
Reply Quote
12/07/2012 01:07 AMPosted by Deadlysynz
- Why should we expect D3 to have all it's goodies upon release if D2 didn't?


Because game designs are supposed to get better as years go by.

It is pathetic to hear that some players are still defending backward steps in game design.

PS : some acounts on these forums are obviously posted by blizzard employees who are disguising as satisfied customers.
Reply Quote
12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
Charms, extra gems and jewels would be an inventory issue at release due to the fact it would've competed for inventory space.


not true or even if it was true is not worthed to reduce endgame content due to lack of storage at lvl 1

12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
Also what would jewels do for the gear that gems do not. You do not want two systems doing the same thing


gems have fixed stats while jewels have random stats same as magic and rare items. All can be said is gems and jewels overlap

12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
That is why the talisman system, charms that were put into a special inventory of 13 1x1, were cut. That is why the mystic was cut because she as well did not add in anything special.


charms/talisman system would add new items which do the same job as current gear. This can be easily balanced by increasing the overall difficulty and none will notice since u would use the charm/talisman system.
The mystic... ok this one is pointless but on the other hand take a look at enchanting from WOW - it does the same thimg

12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
IMO it is lazy design to say that the only way we will challenge a player is to make an enemy immune to an damage type. There are other ways of adding in challenge that are far better than that.


i share ur thoughts on immunities here but that is no excuse to scrap elemental damage types effects and monsters having elemental resistances

Overall when is a possibility (adjust game difficulty) to keep a system that overlap with another why not do so? Not the abundance of features makes a game boring.
Again take a look at WOW: reforging gemming enchanting valor upgrade all those do the same thing. Why those systems still exist?
Reply Quote
It's an unnecessary argument if you like D3. D3 is a better game than D2 was in any form. Your basic assumption is based on the opinions of only the people who agree with you.


Which is most of the people. Smh.


Care to back that up with anything?

Again you have nothing but the opinions of people who agree with you. Yet you put it out there like it was a fact. Ill tell you something else there were people who thought D2 was inferior to D1. There's nothing magical about not liking a game, people do it every day. It doesn't make them automagically right.



So is yours, how exactly did you add anything to the discussion with that? If you wanted to praise D3 you could have argued against his points but instead all you did was say "Well the people who disagree with you think your wrong" DUH. Then you say "D3 is a better game than D2 was in any form" Thats a huge statement to make I wonder how you will support your statement.....oh you didn't at all. No surprise there.


Opinions don't need support. They're opinions and that's all the weight they carry. This constant echo chamber arguing is beyond silly. D3 is not and will never be D2. If you don't like that tough. No one is going to win friends and influence people through repeitition. It just drives people away until the chanting monkey forum chorus thinks they've won something by talking to themselves.
Edited by Zymurgeist#1185 on 12/9/2012 4:11 AM PST
Reply Quote


why? is easier to copy paste than to create new features
so if they added all features D2 had the sxpansion(s) would require new features to be created which require hard work


I think you missed the point. They needed to take the core ideas and concepts....use them!, AND make them better!. That means keep runes in some form, keep charms in some form, keep the skill tree in some form.. etc etc etc They didn't do that at all they removed all of them and replaced them with.....completely different crap that didn't add anything to the game or they just didn't replace them with anything.


maybe but all they added since 1.03 or earlier is a copy pase from D2 and not even reworked/adjusted for better fit D3
Reply Quote
12/09/2012 03:56 AMPosted by Zymurgeist


Which is most of the people. Smh.


Care to back that up with anything?

Again you have nothing but the opinions of people who agree with you. Yet you put it out there like it was a fact. Ill tell you something else there were people who thought D2 was inferior to D1. There's nothing magical about not liking a game, people do it every day. It doesn't make them automagically right.

Go look at game review sites. Customer/user reviews, not the Editors. You'll find he's actually quite right.

Though I will agree that it's an unnecessary argument, especially when viewed from any blissfully ignorant perspective without question, or anything to "back it up".
Reply Quote


Care to back that up with anything?

Again you have nothing but the opinions of people who agree with you. Yet you put it out there like it was a fact. Ill tell you something else there were people who thought D2 was inferior to D1. There's nothing magical about not liking a game, people do it every day. It doesn't make them automagically right.

Go look at game review sites. Customer/user reviews, not the Editors. You'll find he's actually quite right.

Though I will agree that it's an unnecessary argument, especially when viewed from any blissfully ignorant perspective without question, or anything to "back it up".


The chattering classes don't have any lock on truth either. People voted with their wallets in the millions. They must have found some value in the game. How is my perspective in any way blissfully ignorant? I have played the game. I played D2 for years. I still play D1 on occasion.
Reply Quote
People voted with their wallets in the millions. They must have found some value in the game.


Ya they definitely "voted with their wallets" during the first week of release because they had obviously played the finished game and seen how good it was BEFORE they purchased it.

OR they are huge Diablo fans and counted on Blizzard to not let them down....
Edited by stryker#1589 on 12/9/2012 5:09 AM PST
Reply Quote
Opinions don't need support. They're opinions and that's all the weight they carry. This constant echo chamber arguing is beyond silly. D3 is not and will never be D2. If you don't like that tough. No one is going to win friends and influence people through repeitition. It just drives people away until the chanting monkey forum chorus thinks they've won something by talking to themselves.


You can't argue your opinion unless you tell people WHY you have it. If you don't want to argue it then don't post?
Reply Quote
12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
Charms, extra gems and jewels would be an inventory issue at release due to the fact it would've competed for inventory space.


This really is a non-issue and I believe is a terrible way of trying to defend the game. A feature could not be added because we could not think of a way to integrate it? Surely I can expect that Blizzard has some level of competence in this regard? For example

Charm bag: Fixed.

Call it a 'Ju Ju Bag' and then you can link it to some WD lore. There. I have done it.


This guy came up with this idea in a good 5 seconds I daresay and honestly it seems a whole lot better than saying that adding things was "too hard" and so we decided to strip the game of all complexity.

12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
Also what would jewels do for the gear that gems do not. You do not want two systems doing the same thing. That is why the talisman system, charms that were put into a special inventory of 13 1x1, were cut. That is why the mystic was cut because she as well did not add in anything special.


Here I agree with you, this seems to be the direction that the game has taken from the beginning. Why have stat points when they are "obviously" garbage. Why have skulls and diamonds when we can work with only 4 gems. This is the reason we have ended up with a game that resembles closer a poor version of Gauntlet Legends instead of Diablo. Hell, why have 4 gems when I could just have 1 type and let the game decide what is best for me in each slot? This has already been done with stat points so seriously, why not?

12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
IMO it is lazy design to say that the only way we will challenge a player is to make an enemy immune to an damage type. There are other ways of adding in challenge that are far better than that.
]

Again I agree. But I never said that the "only way" to have a challenge is to add immunities. I was just using this as an example to show that the game has been dumbed down from what D2 was. I agree that there are better ways of adding in challenge but I very strongly believe that rage timers are not one of them....

12/09/2012 03:07 AMPosted by ShadowAegis
I say before you say how easy or hard something is then do this. Go make or work on a game of this size and magnitude. Then you can come back and say how easy or hard it is.


And again I agree. I will admit I do not know how hard it is to add something. I have not worked on a game of this magnitude and I never will. I also say that unless you work for Blizzard, which you very well might, then you also do not know how hard or easy it is. That said, I also finished my original post saying that I actually do not think that it is relevant how "hard" it is. This game had plenty of time, a large budget, and a great precursor game to base itself off. Saying that something was not done because it was "hard" is a bit of a cop-out and again just reinforces the idea that the game was lazily put together.
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]