Why D3 Never Had A Chance From The Core.

General Discussion
11/13/2016 09:30 PMPosted by iCamp
The journey is so boring. If I pay to goto Hawaii I want to be at the destination. The long flight is a pain in the A.


LUL

it's all about the journey. If you don't care about the journey arpg is not your genre then. In fact, life is all about the journey as well. Happy traveling LUL
[quote="207504781665"]
Crit, you could indeed screw your character up in Morrowind. I never played Daggerfall, so I don't know about that one, but because of the way skills and characters leveled, you could end up with a lopsided skill set unable to deal with difficult battles. You had to be very cagey about how you leveled your character, what skills you used, to avoid this. This was not true in Oblivion and obviously, not true in Skyrim. But it was true in Morrowind.


Morrowind was indeed the one that I played the least, TBH. Still, it doesn't seem like it was as big a part of the game as it was in Diablo II. Or maybe it just seems like a bigger issue in Diablo II because the the Diablo III devs were hellbent on preventing it. Still, comparing Skyrim to Diablo II, the better balance was struck between playing the character you want and being able to screw up your character.

Honestly though, I remember one game in particular was going to be a "WoW killer" (never happened of course) and one of the better things I remember reading about it was that it was going to focus more on the game than the endgame. I really wish I could remember what that game was, I'm fairly sure it was the Warhammer one though, but I can't remember for sure.

That has actually been one of my huge complaints about modern games of late. Too much focus on the Endgame. Original inferno was right about where I thought it would be, but D3V nightmare mode should have been about as hard as D3V hell mode was. The first clear of hell should have been about the time people were bragging about their first inferno clear.
11/13/2016 09:30 PMPosted by iCamp
The journey is so boring. If I pay to goto Hawaii I want to be at the destination. The long flight is a pain in the A.


Except in this case the destination is ultimately coming back home, which means it is like paying to go to Hawaii and your instantly sitting in your house sporting sunburn with pictures and souvenirs from your trip.

Just giving someone the result of their trip kind of defeats the purpose doesn't it.
I want D2.5. I will post everyday about it for years. I hate D3.

Am I doing it right?
One of my favorite things in these discussion like threads on where Diablo 3 failed, I'd considering how small the game is. Not that content equals quality, but when you think about D2 came out 15 years ago with 4 large acts, only 4 years after D1, which was released with mere 16 layers.

D3 brought nothing, it just copied the same areas once more, and even mimicked the journey, and constantly tries to be D2 and incorporate elements of D2, without even focusing on the important parts of D2. So it just comes as a great disappointment when you look at what similar big titles bring with them in a new game. 15 years, huge improvements in the gaming industry but still a smaller game. It's so sad.
You can trade if we have a cut, no cut - no trade
Wow very well said. I do see an end to this game where there is just no more to do. Even so I really do enjoy this game, and I do hope that they can keep it that way for me for awhile (Ive only played like 2 months). Ive wasted years probably of my life on D2, and look forward to playing it again (Once I can get a copy) when D3 bores me. Which will frankly be awhile they way I play.

You are right though. D3 is not D2. I don't think at this point they can change that. Maybe D4 (if it comes) will be more like D2 in a lot of ways, that would be great, I do miss blues and yellows being worth something. Though I really have a hard time seeing Blizzard going away from the pay to play model. Either way though, for the hundreds if not thousands of hours I will get out of D3, its money well spent.

If they can give us a skill tree, and better loot. Maybe, just MAYBE they can keep D3 afloat for years to come. I do see this game eventually just running out of players. It sucks because I love all of the Diablo franchise, even D3.

I hope it all works out for us in the end.
11/13/2016 07:50 PMPosted by gauss
Action Role-playing games are about the journey, not the destination.


yes, that did hold true from 1.00-1.08.... with RoS and the lastest RoS-patches however they made sure you're at the destination within a few days, sadly...
11/14/2016 01:15 PMPosted by Alukat
yes, that did hold true from 1.00-1.08

WATT? - did you even play at that time, because sometimes I really do wonder, or if you just glorify the pre 2.0 days.

1.0 and forward were equally bad about the journey, it has all always been about the post level 70 content. And the post level 70 content is horrible, and always has been.
11/13/2016 07:50 PMPosted by gauss
So, I'm sure a lot of people over the years, no doubt including some of the devs, have wondered why there is such a hatred against this game and why so many of the old fans of the franchise don't seem to like it. Many people have done their best to describe the reasons, but it always seems to end up being ineffable--you're either the kind of person who "gets it" or you're not. I think I found a way to describe it that will make sense to the the people who don't get it, and it involves going all the way back to first principles.

You see, the first two games in the Diablo franchise were action role-playing games. I felt the need to type that out in long form so you can really see the words "role-playing". Essentially an ARPG is a real-time rogue-like. If you don't know what a rogue-like is, they are games that usually have permadeath, lots of randomness, and involve an extremely difficult adventure to find a mcguffin while scrounging for resources and artfully dodging death around every corner. These games were/are primarily turn-based.

The original Diablo was an attempt to take this concept and put it into real-time. In fact, it was originally turn-based as well at some point in its development. D1 was a real-time rogue-like. You can see this in many aspects of the game, such as the fact that you have to learn all your spells from finding scrolls, as an example. D2 followed in the same footsteps, just bigger and better. So what, you say? Get to the point.

Action Role-playing games are about the journey, not the destination. This is an extremely important point because D3 was designed completely backwards from this. D3 uses the MMO model that places the destination above the journey. We need only look at WoW to see this.

One of the reasons that stat points were removed and the skill system was changed is because Blizzard wanted players to experiment freely without fear of screwing up their characters, because in their mind a flawed character is a bad thing, and if they were making an MMO they would be right. The final strength of your character in an ARPG shouldn't really matter, only that you had a fun, unique, and interesting adventure making your way to the end. In an MMO like WoW, all that matters is that you can participate in the endless cycle of improving your character and clearing more content so you can improve your character so you can ...

When WoW launched it was common to spend 3 months of grinding to reach level 60. Imagine finding out that you could never do end game raids because you screwed up your stat points? They wanted to avoid this problem in D3, but that is wrong thinking because Diablo isn't an MMO and it doesn't function like an MMO.

Diablo, and other ARPG's, are ideally about encountering novel challenges and finding novel ways of overcoming them. There is a lot of randomness, and many different choices to make. There are lots of resources to manage and it's not always easy to know what's an upgrade and what isn't. You may even end up switching things around or using the same item for a prolonged period of time due to an insane effect or because your challenges have shifted. All that matters is that you were able to overcome with the items you were able to find in conjunction with your deft control and industrious resource management. (I remember early on in D2 making a necromancer that had no direct damage and Diablo killed all my summons and I didn't know what to do, so I bought a wand with bone spear and farmed mana pots until I could kite him down. It was memorable and taught me a lesson. The game let me build a character that was very lopsided in terms of power and that is how it should be.)

Let's contrast this to WoW. If I level a new character to max level, and then turn around and level another one of the same race and class, the experience will likely be nearly identical. There are no lessons to learn, no freedom to make mistakes, and no novelty. If you want to skip it, Blizzard sells level boosts and playing with friends can give you XP boosts. They have to bribe tanks and healers with goodie bags to do heroic dungeons because there are no upgrades in there for them. These are all signs that the destination is what matters, and that players will skip the journey when there is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

Sadly, D3 was designed with the WoW/Destination model of steady smooth progression until an end goal is met. Players felt this even if they couldn't explain it. Loot felt bland and meaningless and at the end of the grind it all felt hollow because getting to the "end", whether that means beating the hardest difficulty or getting all the loot you wanted, is a destination in a game that should be about the journey. Paragon levels, rifts, 6 piece sets--all of it is just a way to extend the grind, pushing the "end" further back so that the shallowness doesn't come until later.

Of course they did some things right. The combat is smooth and engaging. However, that can only keep a person's attention for so long. When the maps are samey, the loot is samey, and the grind feels pointless because you already know what you're grinding for, then D3 is sort of like leveling a new WoW toon to max over and over again.


That is the good stuff, bravo!

Amen to rogue-like action role playing game that Diablo series was and should be, if Blizzard wants to get back the rep. and old fans (me included).
Death around every corner, journey, gritty deadly world invaded by devils, demons
and psyho cultists, randomization, map generation with every play through and the most important IMO the ability to fail with your character etc. etc. - the essence of the series!
Just to touch on the build/skill changes on the fly.

1. Really liked it at first because it gave you the chance to adapt instantly to a changing challenge

2. The fact that it's switcherooville 24/7 does kind of irk me. used to play another game that.. well... you could REALLY mess up your character if you chose the wrong skill at lvl 14 (or found out that you didn't pick a proper prerequisite skill so you couldn't get your travel power until 2 more levels etc)

But what that game had was a set of specific respec trials. Didn't like your build? Wish you'd put points elsewhere? Gather a group of like minded individuals (or someone that just wanted a freespec banked away for later use) and bam. The challenge was on, could you beat it and therefore get that respec you needed?

It provided a way to 'correct' a character without having to roll a new one and spend 30+ hours just getting back to where you were, when you realized the mistake. Or... you could do one multi-mission trial with a group, and get that change you needed.

In D3 i would imagine a challenge like a set dungeon, a grift, cursed event etc, but on a different (more challenging scale). Mainly because if it was just a money/mats sink then the botters and streamers would be the only ones to benefit from it. Would like to see it be a challenge, but not a puffball fight, nor an inferno run with only i60 gear.
11/13/2016 07:50 PMPosted by gauss
Action Role-playing games are about the journey, not the destination.

This.
11/14/2016 07:34 PMPosted by GrandeM
11/13/2016 07:50 PMPosted by gauss
Action Role-playing games are about the journey, not the destination.

This.


yes and that journey(grinding) has to be a PvE challenge, not an PvP encounter(agression)
Posted by Chaosgod4
I think being able to use any build you want at will is a plus, not a minus.

I can understand that sentiment even if it's not my preference, especially if you don't have lots of time to roll new characters, but at the same time, they did so much of that catering in D3 that there is never a point to rolling a new character of the same class at all and that seems criminal in this genre.


I can understand both positions. Personally I prefer the ability to re-spec that's found in D3 because it gives me the chance to try different builds. In D2 you could screw up your build so it wasn't hell viable, or you could find a 'build defining' unique which didn't fit your spec. Both instances are frustrating and lead to power leveling.

I also agree with the sentiment that RPGs are meant to be about the journey. But I'm not sure D2 had such a great journey. In D2 when you wanted to spec a different character you typically had a friend power-level you, hoarding skill points until you could assign them to your 'end game' allotment. Your character existed in a vulnerable state (i.e. you may or may not be able to adventure alone) until you reached the level where you could start assigning skill points to your chosen skills or equip muled gear. That kind of gameplay circumvents the journey. And we see similar power leveling practices in D3 (although for entirely different reasons). I think both games suffer when it comes to the journey aspect compared to typical RPGs for entirely different reasons. But I also never played Diablo for the journey, for me it was more about the loot hunt and different builds.

Off topic a little but the biggest advantage I see with D2 is the difficulty of the game is finite, which opens up all sorts of builds that are "viable". There exists flexibility within the game to create different/interesting builds with a variety of skills to complete the same content. There would be builds that would be faster, do more damage, etc... but you could dream up different combinations to accomplish the same thing. While the introduction of Greater Rifts was to create competitive end game content, it also contributed to the lack of build diversity because there will always be a top build.

I thank the OP for the interesting and thought provoking post!
11/14/2016 07:47 PMPosted by mcdougal
In D2 when you wanted to spec a different character you typically had a friend power-level you, hoarding skill points until you could assign them to your 'end game' allotment. Your character existed in a vulnerable state (i.e. you may or may not be able to adventure alone) until you reached the level where you could start assigning skill points to your chosen skills or equip muled gear. That kind of gameplay circumvents the journey.


This was not inherent to the game, though, the game doesn't promote it even, this was all players doing what they tend to do when they start feeling lazy and decide to want to bypass the journey to reach the end result of their own volition.

I started a new character yesterday, offline, and it has been fantastic. If people would just stop, slow the hell down and play the game the way it was designed to be played again, they would see how different the game is compared to how they view it after playing the online glitch rush game for years on end.
They went PG. That's the problem: Dumbed down story (It seriously is !@#$, I felt it was written for kids), gothic/horror atmosphere missing, game way too forgiving.
OP quote:
Action Role-playing games are about the journey, not the destination.

yes and you want an d2 PvP journey, with a PvP leaderboard as ego-board
You wrote exactly what i always thinked about the game! I always felt that something was missing. All we do is rifts...and more rifts... There is no journey anymore.
I like this game, there is some good stuff. The number of skills, the battle in some aspects. But the essence of the game is wrong! I dont feel like playing d1 or d2. This is different, and by the bad way...

Congratulations for the post!

Ps. Sorry for my english. But i need to say this, you made a good point. cya
Very well said. It is sad they choose this direction at the very beginning, they screwed old fans by doing so, but if they stop or change drastically, they screwed the fan boys now.

In my opinion, just for once, care less on the "balance" and keep coming out new, unique, random items, gameplay and reward, try to divert some players to other direction, hope this will break the chain.
11/14/2016 07:58 PMPosted by Jee
They went PG. That's the problem: Dumbed down story (It seriously is !@#$, I felt it was written for kids), gothic/horror atmosphere missing, game way too forgiving.


When the education system keeps pumping out kids that can't even read... have the attention spans of gnats, and the expectations of unlimited instantaneous wish fulfillment.... what do you expect? /tongueincheek

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum