Diablo® III

because there are 5 classes...

Good point OP. All the classes cant play together at once.

*Give player 5 man parties*

*Expension get realeased *

QQ 6 class, we need 6 man parties AT LEAST!


I would be totally happy with 6. That would be fine.

4 = not enough

6 = just right

8 = take it or leave it for most ppl i think
Reply Quote
Screen gets pretty cluttered with everything going on already. I don't think one more would hurt too much but anything past 5 would be very hard to see what was going on.

I think 4 works pretty well though.
Reply Quote
Screen gets pretty cluttered with everything going on already. I don't think one more would hurt too much but anything past 5 would be very hard to see what was going on.

I think 4 works pretty well though.


agreed, also....even if more classes come out, its not going to come out anytime soon, at least 2 years before they start talking about xpac
Reply Quote
Community Manager
Posts: 3,403
Hey guys! I chatted with Wyatt about this topic on your behalf and, while he's currently at GDC giving a sweet talk about refining game systems in Diablo III (including health recovery, combat controls, and character skills), he shared some information with me that I wanted to pass on.

we should be able to at least have parties of 5 instead of 4

that would at least be a good thing....


We know some players will always prefer to have more than four people in a group, and we respect that completely. Even so, while a larger party size may seem appealing in concept (and even in practice for other games), there are a number of factors which contributed to us deciding on four players for co-op in Diablo III.

First off, the four-player limit isn't in any way related to the number of classes you can play. One reason we actually preferred the idea of four-player co-op as opposed to five was that we felt if the number was five, then players might feel as if it was mandatory to have one of each class in their party. This couldn't be further from the truth. We want players to feel like they can charge through Sanctuary with their friends regardless of whether they have four different classes represented or (for example) a group with two Barbarians and two Witch Doctors.

We also wanted group buffs (like auras and shouts) to feel meaningful in both solo and group play. Right now, you buff yourself and others by the same amount. We like that shouts are good and auras are strong, and that my contribution to the group via my buffs feels significant. But as group sizes get larger, the best player buffs would potentially need to be nerfed either by:

  • Making them to be weaker, and subsequently tuned around multiplayer (which is a similar approach to what World of Warcraft uses)
  • Or reducing the effect buffs have on other players (which is what Diablo II wound up having to do later)

We don't like the idea of these sorts of nerfs and want to avoid them as much as possible, which is part of the combined reason why we aren't eager to increase the maximum size of groups.

Another factor we considered is that of player contributions. We like that you can really notice the contribution of each person at four players. No matter what size group you have, whenever you add another person to a group, each player’s personal contribution is diminished. This has some bad side effects. For example, if you swing at a monster, it feels good when you're doing enough damage to see its health bar move. At four players, it’s already possible to be punching a monster and not feel like you're doing any damage because the bar is moving slowly. This stigma would get worse as you add more people to a group.

Other factors we considered were that of screen noise and the number of players you can follow. At four players, we felt that you were still able to easily keep track of your party-members, but that beyond this size it became more and more difficult to monitor everything on screen. Additionally, the screen noise and spell effects generated by five players simply felt too overwhelming (this is something we tested quite extensively).

In summation, we’re pretty happy about the size of four-player groups. HOWEVER, we know that the multiplayer aspect of Diablo III needs improvement and are already looking into ways that we can further incentivize co-op farming and efficiency in patch 1.0.8. Wyatt is currently working on a developer journal about this very topic, so we hope to share even more information soon. :)
Edited by Lylirra on 3/28/2013 9:38 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Community Manager
Posts: 3,403
03/28/2013 12:24 PMPosted by Sÿlak
Plus it was stated before that too many players would clutter the screen.


Yup! (That's actually called out a little later in my reply, too.)
Reply Quote
In D2 party size was 8 players and there were no issues with buffs.

There were actually incentives to play together.

Don't try to find false arguments Lylirra.
Edited by Kwyjibo#2528 on 3/28/2013 12:29 PM PDT
Reply Quote
03/28/2013 12:25 PMPosted by Lylirra
Plus it was stated before that too many players would clutter the screen.


Yup! (That's actually called out a little later in my reply, too.)


Hello Lylirra, could you please take a look at this thread?

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8480588681

It is very important, thank you!
Reply Quote
I can see it now.

Blizz ups games to 8 player
Number of public games drops in half
Trollollololls rush to General screaming, OMG this game is dead theres only XXX public games.

It would be interesting to completely gray the screen out with 8 WDs spammping 0 dogs. Ill pass, thank you.
Reply Quote
You know what pisses me off???
the fact that they have not mentioned once about the expansion... the game has been out for a year now, and nothing...
they had better make at least 3 new character for the expansion, no joke
if not, i wont buy it at all, u lost one customer here, and guys the reason the game is not as good as it should be, is because of activision made them release a game that was not ready
the original blizzard, would have simply delayed or pushed the release date back, cuz they knwo its not ready
Reply Quote
"players might feel as if it was mandatory to have one of each class in their party."
This couldn't be further from the truth.


Kind of funny, I think you couldnt be further from the truth by suggesting players would feel one of each class is anywhere near mandatory. But alas, why give us the option to choose our 5 when you think it would limit us into wanting a specific set of 5.

Don't you know parties are made up mostly of barbs anyway??????????
Reply Quote
In D2 party size was 8 players and there were no issues with buffs.There were actually incentives to play together.Don't try to find false arguments Lylirra.


did you ever stop and think maybe those buffs where designed around 8 players in mind and in D3 the buffs where designed with 4 players in mind? different amount of players in games have stuff balenced around it. the skills arnt just balenced 1 vs monsters then add player amount for lols
Reply Quote
I'd be fine with a nerf... it could scale with how many people are in your party.
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)

Reported!

[Close]