Diablo® III

One question for ur dev team

One statement I’ve seen over and over on these forums and elsewhere are proposals for “easy” fixes and overarching assumptions about how long implementation for a variety of changes “should” take.

The reality is, game development is a hugely iterative and time-consuming process, with many people involved along the way. Design takes time, Coding takes time, art takes time, QA takes time: you name it. There are also multiple steps in the pipeline for each and every proposed change and bug fix, no matter how minor, and what issues are being worked on in what order and by who can and do change as new matters arise. Sometimes extra testing is also needed for bugs that come back broken and need to be retested, because we didn't want them to go live with a bad fix.

While there may indeed be a list of known issues and bugs that run alongside some patches, for every one you are aware of, there can be dozens or hundreds being worked on behind-the-scenes that you likely never be aware of. We do things just as quickly as we can, but even then, it’s a process that takes time.


You are probably right, but i know for sure one thing - Diablo 3 team is slow as turtles. I don't know how you are working and how sophisticated desgin/work is, but you are insanely slow.

Maybe there are like 3 people in Diablo 3 team, then i understand, otherwise it's just insane.

Just an example. You showed us PvP arenas in 2010, right? More than 2 years later, you didn't make a single improvement on them, nothing, completely forgotten. And then you released PvP which prolly took 2 hours to make. Just enable player hostility and you are good to go.

I find it hilarious when children and out-of-touch adults like to chime in with how long certain things should take to implement without having any personal experience whatsoever. Designing anything worthwhile takes skill, money, and patience. I find it entirely believable that many of the original team has moved on to other projects within Blizzard (Jay was simply the only visible one).

Diablo III receives less attention than Starcraft II because there's no e-sport component to it and thus less advertising revenue and marketing possibilities beyond the initial purchase. Further, both Diablo III and Starcraft II receive far less attention than World of Warcraft because there's no subscription fees associated with those games. The amount of money that can be used towards maintaining a game is a function of many things that Diablo III just doesn't have.

So, it's no surprise that these relatively small patches takes months to achieve compared to World of Warcraft's absolutely massive game-changing patches every 2-3 months. The development budget and financial incentive to add new content to Diablo III is a fraction of other games within Blizzard's studios.


You can say whatever you want, but they took 7 years to ship a RPG game without PvP and without any end game. If you consider that fine then it's funny.
Edited by ALPINA#1474 on 1/19/2013 9:50 AM PST
Reply Quote
One statement I’ve seen over and over on these forums and elsewhere are proposals for “easy” fixes and overarching assumptions about how long implementation for a variety of changes “should” take.

The reality is, game development is a hugely iterative and time-consuming process, with many people involved along the way. Design takes time, Coding takes time, art takes time, QA takes time: you name it. There are also multiple steps in the pipeline for each and every proposed change and bug fix, no matter how minor, and what issues are being worked on in what order and by who can and do change as new matters arise. Sometimes extra testing is also needed for bugs that come back broken and need to be retested, because we didn't want them to go live with a bad fix.

While there may indeed be a list of known issues and bugs that run alongside some patches, for every one you are aware of, there can be dozens or hundreds being worked on behind-the-scenes that you likely never be aware of. We do things just as quickly as we can, but even then, it’s a process that takes time.


The problem is that many smaller indie companies are able to do it, why is that? Also none of your dev team even interacts with the community, Jay Wilson had like 2 forum posts in his 7 years in sanctuary, is that a joke? Any criticism are met with folding and appeasing to the masses, its like nobody has any vision beyond what does the highest % of paying customers want (and it was nerfs/inferno nerfs). Any official progress comes from quarterly blogs or CMs acknowledging problems but offering no timeline or anything substantial in forms of fixes, we understand things take time but its obvious the dev team is just too inefficient, whatever the reasons are. 7 years in sanctuary and you just realize that not only is the game totally unrewarding, but pvp is as well, so that you scrap together a dueling system that doesnt even have a queue system and relies on your terrible chat system? You can polish a turd and even call it a chicken sandwich but eventually you can't hide the fact that it is indeed a turd, and it will never taste like a chicken sandwich.

Look at Minecraft and Warcraft III, if Blizz released and supported a map editor instead of supporting multiboxing, the game might actually thrive.
Reply Quote


Many of the biggest decisions and "inventions/breakthroughs" have been made by NOBODIES that started with a dream of doing something in their garage... the problem with America is we are so concerned with what initials fall after our names rather than who is actually brilliant and has a creative fire. And some of the guys on here, including myself, given the means could create masterworks with the tools available to these people... again, another Blizzard Pole Smoker... GTFO. I'm a bigger fanboy than you, but I'm not blind...


lol sure. if you think its so easy to make a game, lets see you make a one for ios or android.
Reply Quote

lol sure. if you think its so easy to make a game, lets see you make a one for ios or android.
I don't think you quite got what he was saying.

Also, people have different roles within the company. For example, a lead designer (such as Jay Wilson) is responsible for, pretty much the framework of a game. A lead designer needs to have a vision for the game, have his detailed ideas and concepts documented for which the team can work off of. This is essentially the game itself written down on paper.

He will then communicate with his team (who are specialists in their field) so that they can produce that particular part in the game, for example, cinematics, sound, etc.

No, "one person" is responsible for everything, which is how you are making it sound. For me to be reputable in your eyes, I have to make a whole game by myself, on your stated platform of choice even when I am not a specialist in as many fields as required to make an entire game by myself.

Even Torchlight 1 and 2, were made by a group of what, 26 people? To be successful at making a game, even an indie game, you need a team that specializes in important parts of the game in order to successfully produce it. You need a programmer, artist, sound director, lead designer, etc.
Edited by speedforce#1637 on 1/19/2013 10:40 AM PST
Reply Quote
01/18/2013 06:09 PMPosted by Vaeflare
The reality is, game development is a hugely iterative and time-consuming process, with many people involved along the way. Design takes time, Coding takes time, art takes time, QA takes time: you name it


Oh I see Vae, just cuz your "CCO" Rob guy spoke out upset about what the community is saying you have follow suit and say stop getting impatient and understand that this stuff takes time? Really?

That's not going to work, you've been with us reading our posts this whole time since Beta, we've been damn patient Vae - that's not even fair of you to try to defend that at this point in time.

The priority went elsewhere, that's the bottom line or it would have been done by now is what they're trying to say. Sooner y'all can admit that, the sooner we can move on and get what we want changed that's a priority.

Work with us, if we're telling you this should have been done awhile ago then that should be a priority feedback to your devs with sense of urgency above the other things. I realize they're working and already planning to implement stuff, but if said other issue is a priority then it should be put above what they want to do right now. Make sense?
Edited by MasterJay#1651 on 1/19/2013 10:59 AM PST
Reply Quote
I think Dev time for D3 can be summed up with: Skeleton crew.

So it is probably like less than 10 people working on it now, which is insane for the resources available. Add in the bureaucracy of mega company and you get 8 month wait for 4 man dueling to be patched in.

I suggest this because when the thumbscrews are really turned tight, they fix that exploit TODAY, so they do have capabilities to get things finished, but that is not blizz/activision/Moneyman's? priority.

This is clearly speculation. I would love it, and certainly other lowly fans too, if direction of diablo 3 was explicit. Like the suggestion to just list dev top 5 priority for the week. You would imagine with the 'power of the internet' getting to talk to real people working on a particular game would be simple and almost daily. Nope though, just PR speak and TY FOR PLAYING!
Reply Quote
Posts: 571
One statement I’ve seen over and over on these forums and elsewhere are proposals for “easy” fixes and overarching assumptions about how long implementation for a variety of changes “should” take.

The reality is, game development is a hugely iterative and time-consuming process, with many people involved along the way. Design takes time, Coding takes time, art takes time, QA takes time: you name it. There are also multiple steps in the pipeline for each and every proposed change and bug fix, no matter how minor, and what issues are being worked on in what order and by who can and do change as new matters arise. Sometimes extra testing is also needed for bugs that come back broken and need to be retested, because we didn't want them to go live with a bad fix.

While there may indeed be a list of known issues and bugs that run alongside some patches, for every one you are aware of, there can be dozens or hundreds being worked on behind-the-scenes that you likely never be aware of. We do things just as quickly as we can, but even then, it’s a process that takes time.


Let's pretend that you guys aren't the only gaming company in the world and that other game companies release updates and fixes in a timely manner, with less of a constant supply of income via RMAH transactions than you. Then let's realize it isn't really a dream and everything I said above is true, and you're really just giving excuses for your corporate Vivendi who calls all the shots when money (ultimately, the only goal of a corporation) is involved. Corporations love money! They also love investing as little as possible for high net profits!
Reply Quote
I think Dev time for D3 can be summed up with: Skeleton crew.

So it is probably like less than 10 people working on it now, which is insane for the resources available. Add in the bureaucracy of mega company and you get 8 month wait for 4 man dueling to be patched in.

I suggest this because when the thumbscrews are really turned tight, they fix that exploit TODAY, so they do have capabilities to get things finished, but that is not blizz/activision/Moneyman's? priority.

This is clearly speculation. I would love it, and certainly other lowly fans too, if direction of diablo 3 was explicit. Like the suggestion to just list dev top 5 priority for the week. You would imagine with the 'power of the internet' getting to talk to real people working on a particular game would be simple and almost daily. Nope though, just PR speak and TY FOR PLAYING!


This is true.

I think at the end of the day it just comes down to Upper Management not devoting enough crew to Diablo 3 and there's nothing the devs, the CMs or even the creative team can do about that - that's a company decision. A bad decision seeing as WoW is going to keep on being successful...really doesn't need all the crew and hours going there, it has it's franchise player base and addicts already..Diablo III is losing it.

They could be making so much MORE money off the RMAH right now if the economy wasn't an utter fail if they had even half of the player base numbers they did from May to July and if the money cap wasn't so low. But no OMG must have MOP be a super smash success so let's drag 90% of the crew over there and leave D3 with scraps. Whatever floats your boat Upper Management...
Reply Quote
01/18/2013 06:32 PMPosted by zobudeny
POE, Torchlight 2 and also Diablo 2 had much faster development for his age

Hahahhah, PoE is the only one that may have a chance. D2 had no competition. TL2 for reals?
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,063
View profile
01/19/2013 09:55 AMPosted by Monsta
lol sure. if you think its so easy to make a game, lets see you make a one for ios or android.


I'm an artist and a sculptor and many of my large scale works will be around 100s of years from now... so I have nothing to prove... I've had many opportunities to turn my resume in to Blizzard, Bungie... etc and have not... why, because I just don't want it enough. Besides that... if I see behind the scenes, I may just lose that love for the game... it's like seeing the wizard behind the curtain... it just doesn't appeal to me. But, again, if they asked me I wouldn't turn them down :P
Reply Quote
01/18/2013 06:09 PMPosted by Vaeflare
We do things just as quickly as we can,


Since day 1 people wanted to be able to dye legendary why 8months later this still has not been done?
Why is the coding so complicated that it takes years to change something so simple?
Reply Quote
I think you guys are wearing down the blues. I don't know if that's sad or if congratulations is in order.

My thought on the 7 years of development -

Maybe they should have released an actual beta rather than a glorified hardware test. All of act 1 or something... maybe then they could have gotten early feedback on what an unsatisfying grind the first iteration of the game was and then been able to get a jump on the revisions we are just now beginning to enjoy. Revisions which honestly may be too late.

Kind of like how StarCraft approaches its betas?
Edited by warblob#1937 on 1/19/2013 11:52 AM PST
Reply Quote
Stop protecting your bad developers.
Reply Quote
01/18/2013 06:09 PMPosted by Vaeflare
The reality is, game development is a hugely iterative and time-consuming process, with many people involved along the way. Design takes time, Coding takes time, art takes time, QA takes time: you name it.


u need another 7 years or what?
Reply Quote
In all honesty i'm 100% certain that a handful of people remain working on Diablo 3 and they probably spend alot of downtime goofing around, throwing a ball around, playing ping pong etc....
lolololol that's how I see it in my mind too, might as well rofl!!

speaking of work environments, I saw a documentary on Google's work environment. They have a slide, fireman's pole, free food (prepped by chefs), game room, private cabins, free massages, etc.
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]