Get the Desktop App for Battle.net Now
- All your games in 1 place
- Log in once
- Automatic game updates
A game starts with a idea of what a game should be, those ideas are used to create it in that image.
A game is going in the right direction as long as it follows the opinions of the creator/teams idea of a good game. Players that share that view will become it's playerbase.
The creator of a sequel follows the original creators ideas and then adds to it.
The previous player base is added to it
A sequel of a sequel follows both the of the previous.
Inheriting the collective playerbase.
Diablo3 started as the teams idea of diablo.
Then they realized that their idea was too different from the previous version.
It wasn't atractive to the same playerbase. So they asked the playerbase how to correct that.
They did this using forums. The diablo fanbase isn't used to using forums.
It happend to be a Blizzard game and the wow playerbase is used to using forums.
The game started changing drastically in beta. Most of the diablo fanbase started playing at release.
They were soo confused about the game mechanics they came to forums to see what gives.
They found a seperate playerbase with a opposing set of ideas about what this game should be about.
That's when diablo3 became about politics.
The future of the game is based on casting your majority vote on forums
The two groups can't possibly have a game that appeals to both of them.
So who is this game currently designed for?
People who are addicted to forums because they enjoy politics.
I don't mind it, but I seriously doubt this is what the creators vision consisted of.
Diablo3 is about politics, if you have a stronger counter argument, have at thee.
"politics" dictates the direction of this game, the blizzard is just an illusion.
Is more likely.
The design philosophy of this game has never shown any lasting consistency.
Patches consist of a collection of the most popular posts suggestions.
Explain how that is different if the most popular feedback is implemented?
Recent example :
Drothvader makes 3 posts about buffing MP, gains majority support, it passes through all the appropriate channels, appears in next patch.
I'm not saying there's a problem with this type of system.
I'm saying this is the system and that is politics.
The two groups on forums and blizzard ideals are all too conflicting to ever come to a resolution in this manner.
Edited by Vencenzo#1510 on 1/12/2013 12:54 PM PST
I agree to an extent OP.... but i played d2 and still certainly know how to use forums lmao.
The fact is, what it will always be.... elitists vs. casuals, with many in the middle swaying tides.
Personally i'm a little of both.... ideally i like to play 2-3 hours a day, so i feel kind of half casual lol.... i enjoy challenging but not tedious, and i also like to feel that I'm in direct control of where my character is heading, and some of that is missing here for me.
But elitists will always make people feel like crap for not being "on their level", but at the same time casuals need elitists because most of them provide information flow for casuals to have a chance to be awesome too lol.
But generally in the end if both sides can be appeased enough to continue playing it generally makes for an overall better game, conflict allows progression and change if handled properly.
Anyway.... like the post :-)
Conflict and debate are the steps that come before understanding.
But what happens when the two groups come to the understand that they want diametrically opposing things?
A constant power struggle to get the game to appeal to their version of fun.
A game that changes it's philosophy frequently attempting to appeal to both versions of fun.
This is a perpetual state of conflict unable to reach a conclusion.
It's the same as having a government that holds both the ideal of capitalism and equality at the same time.
^That's basically a tldr version of what I am questioning.
The leader(s) of a country don't have the luxury of absolute ideals or black and white generalizations. They have to appeal to people with different versions of right or wrong.
A careful balance of grey must be maintained.
When two groups that can not possibly exist under the same ruleset clash, the result is a civil war. These forums IRL would closely resemble that.
A game is not the same, it uses a absolute ideal then lets people who share it become the playerbase. That's a how a maximum level of fun is achieved, it's relative to the players taste. That's why soo many different games exist and retain a similar design philosophy over time.
Edited by Vencenzo#1510 on 1/12/2013 1:31 PM PST
I agree it could end that way, which is why I added "if handled properly" lol, but i totally agree.... hopefully we can find some common ground, where if not "happy" people are at least satiated and we can get to a point where everyone is having some fun.
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.