PTR Patch Notes Updated 9 April - Stash Change

General Discussion
Prev 1 40 41 42 65 Next
04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis
Unfortunately, we will be unable to provide any additional stash tabs to console players, and we are limiting the number for PC to keep Diablo III the fast paced, loot explosion we all love.


So... Does this mean we'll get some QoL on looting? It'd be nice to have the option to allow materials to be auto-looted like gold or at least picked up by pets if we have it in inventory already. I don't see a reason to make us have to click each type of material every few meters. All it does is destroy our hardware faster, take the fun out of the game, and contribute to muscle/tendon fatigue and possibly injury.
04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis
That doesn't sound like a lot at first, but it adds up very fast. The more actors active in a game (like enemies on screen AND items in your stash), the more the game will tax your system's memory. This issue on console is particularly difficult because there is a limit to how much system memory we can access. PC is more flexible in this manner, which is why we're able to add more stash space there.


Hello there. I think i have a solution for this access memory. There are 2 optional ways:

1 - On act five create the Tyrael warehouse stash. It's a second stash indepent (not shared access between one and other) we could to use after doing a quest to unblock Tyrael stash for we use it.

2 - Make armory/ward robe to work like stash.
-------------------------------------
Originality way it could be added (it could - or just add one of the previous 2 options for free).

1 - first originality idea - To access Tyrael warehouse stash the player need to do a weekly quest. (If the player skip quest after one week the itens will remain there but locked. So when the player back to play it needs to do that quest). So when the player access it won't consume a memory glitch because there are 2 separated chest now.

2 - Second originality idea - All players ask for paragon changes. But paragons don't need to be tied with power creep/status. So you could create secret paragon level (which it's showed up one beside other 7851 | 18 - so the players has 7851 paragon and 18 secret paragon level). Secret paragon level it would earn exp from a different way (by doing quests or tasks one npc ask ? with one option to skip/jump one quest the player has difficult to clear - they would be randomly generated).

3 - third originality idea - Create one second independent (not shared with main stash it's a new) stash access into not cow level or puzle ring portal. The player wanna more space ? Take it. But give some effort in exchange.

So each secret paragon level could be used to:

- Unblock Tyrael's space stash (so to complete one stash tab the player would need to hit 70 secret paragon level and for second stash tab maybe donating primal itens for a npc (or trading primal item for a limited amount of secret paragon exp level progress) it could unblock some space for this new stash - so we would not have more the complain "primal not rewarding enough" *reward with space it's a great thing).

- Increase bloodshard cap. (Each secret paragon level for a limited number of X at maximum increase bloodshard cap for y).
---------------------------------

Goal: With a secondary separated stash a pc player with low memory would not feel the change. And for console the memory loadout would not be huge.

Design: It's like one npc we have a lot of npc but if you put all npc info into just one npc it will cause glitches. For that you create separated npcs, so do the same for stash. So we would own our main stash and one minor stash we would conqueror with something you decided to.
Unfortunately, we will be unable to provide any additional stash tabs to console players, and we are limiting the number for PC to keep Diablo III the fast paced, loot explosion we all love.


Has anyone seen The Truman Show?

The scene where Truman's wife is speaking to Truman, while advertising products to the viewers? And Truman, smelling a fish, looks around the room incredulously and says "what the hell are you talking about? who are you talking to?"

There are so many levels to that scene that are applicable here. Truman is the players. Truman's Wife is Nevalistis. And the people Truman's Wife is talking to is her Bosses. See what I mean - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6U4-KZSoe6g
There will be a list for banned playhers or they just dissappear?
04/27/2019 03:29 AMPosted by spirited
Each player in PoE can have up to 65,000 stash tabs. From what I've seen in various threads on GGG's forums, most people have around 25-100 stash tabs. There has never been any complaints or mention from the players OR devs about performance issues related to inventory. I don't think there is that much difference between player count in either game, and in most cases I'd imagine the playerbase in PoE is bigger.

I have a really hard time believing Nevalistis's explanation because of this. One guy built PoE's engine on a shoestring budget, but Diablo 3 will fall to pieces with 5 more stash tabs? PoE recommends 2GB RAM. So whats going on here?

[/quote]

Exactly what I was wondering...
I can have as many tabs as I want in PoE(bunch of them being special custom tabs) and the game still loads way faster than D3.

Is Blizzard just too lazy to make changes to the game to be able to support more stash tabs?
There is a certain irony in Nev's post.

1) For many (or at least a few) players who multibox where they have 4 open games on the same computer with max stash tabs, the game doesn't have issues.

2) When they were selliing the Necromancer DLC, the extra stash tabs weren't a "technical" problem.

3) If 17 tabs are a problem, then why are we getting them at all? Do they think that they can resolve the "technical" issues but it will take many months into years?
04/27/2019 08:04 AMPosted by MicroRNA
1) For many (or at least a few) players who multibox where they have 4 open games on the same computer with max stash tabs, the game doesn't have issues.


^ Exactly and great point... coming from someone who has done this and on a 5 year old computer as well, albeit a very very good 5 year old computer, but still.

I strongly suspect the implementation of how/why stash works as it does stems back to the AH day so there wouldn't be a huge 'item holder' accounts for resell and laundry services, yet I still call BS on the reason these days.
Haha. Anyone who believes this technical tripe is just a fanboy.

If we give players 5 tabs now, the system will suffer.
If we hold off 2 years and players jump through hoops to get the 5 tabs, the system will be ok.

In a nutshell, this has nothing to do with client issues, memory consumption or any form of bottlenecking whatsover.

Blizzard is trying to make it's a playerbase accomplices to this ruse. Basically, Blizzard is actively saying that in 18 months they are anticipating a significant drop in players and those who are willing to keep boosting their MAU over the next 20+ months will be rewarded for their dedication. (Don't be surprised if they keep extending season lengths and time between seasons to bide their time and to keep dangling this carrot against their current players so 18-20 months becomes 24-30 months as there is no set schedule for seasons.)

Show us the technical numbers/findings and not just the hyperbole associated with this blatant attempt at misdirection.
04/27/2019 08:25 AMPosted by Pariahmonkey
If we give players 5 tabs now, the system will suffer.
If we hold off 2 years and players jump through hoops to get the 5 tabs, the system will be ok.


Indeed and they can not back out and revise their admission of reasoning now either with this below.

Most objects in the games are actors: special effects, enemies, summons, followers, and items. Gems, weapons, armor, potions, pets, crafting materials, and more; all the things we love to horde. All players in a party sync on everything that every player has - in memory, all the time.


So they can't just change to "well, it's a server issue actually" flip-flopping the reason... but you know it's coming in the future.

So they'll have to stick to their facts that it is our crappy computers holding everything back. Shame on us!
*Sigh* I suppose beggars can't be choosers. This wasn't the response I wanted to hear but at least we're getting more communication than normal. I sincerely hope this is indicative of things to come and better policies moving forward.

With that being said, I would like to address the retroactive stash tab plan.

I understand people are frustrated that they would have had tabs right now, but I really do not want them added in retroactively. I ONLY did that requirement for the tabs, after I unlocked all of them I played seasons the way I WANTED to. I was enjoying seasons now that I wasn't railroaded onto an arbitrary goal I didn't like. Retroactively applying them to people who did conqueror earlier is just a bit of a slap in the face. I had done my part, I earned my tabs. I was *done*. Had I known you would be reintroducing the damn things I would have forced myself through it again.

This is why stash tabs are such a toxic point of conversation right now. *EVERYBODY* needs them right now (well mostly everybody, but just roll with me for a second.) Not having those tabs is detrimental to someone like me who plays every class and has to do the inventory shuffle every season. It really honestly is as detrimental as, say, if access to our fourth passive slot were locked behind a seasonal objective. It's really that important.

I understand that there is a limitation on servers and whatnot, but eventually we're going to have those tabs. I guarantee to you I am going to have those tabs because I NEED them. But having to go through FIVE more seasons of these objectives is going to wear me down even more than I already am. I've done this so many times now when I never wanted to begin with. I just want to play the damn season at my pace, in my own way. Please...please try to find an alternative to this, because this solution doesn't help anyone.
04/27/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Brogoth
*Sigh* I suppose beggars can't be choosers. This wasn't the response I wanted to hear but at least we're getting more communication than normal. I sincerely hope this is indicative of things to come and better policies moving forward.


Blizzcon dates were just announced and ticket sale dates are coming up really soon. It's not a coincidence.
04/27/2019 03:29 AMPosted by spirited
Each player in PoE can have up to 65,000 stash tabs. From what I've seen in various threads on GGG's forums, most people have around 25-100 stash tabs. There has never been any complaints or mention from the players OR devs about performance issues related to inventory. I don't think there is that much difference between player count in either game, and in most cases I'd imagine the playerbase in PoE is bigger.

I have a really hard time believing Nevalistis's explanation because of this. One guy built PoE's engine on a shoestring budget, but Diablo 3 will fall to pieces with 5 more stash tabs? PoE recommends 2GB RAM. So whats going on here?

Also, I can't help but notice the timing of this. Just as Blizzcon tickets are available, we get the full and thorough explanation we've been wanting for 40 pages?

Nah. Everything about this is suspicious.


This. A million times this. If GGG can do it, then surely a big "AAA" company like acti-blizz shouldn't be having any sort of issues with a mere 17 tabs. It is very obvious at this point that they are lying to our faces and this is just a sad attempt at increasing the engagement metrics.
04/27/2019 09:08 AMPosted by Pariahmonkey
04/27/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Brogoth
*Sigh* I suppose beggars can't be choosers. This wasn't the response I wanted to hear but at least we're getting more communication than normal. I sincerely hope this is indicative of things to come and better policies moving forward.


Blizzcon dates were just announced and ticket sale dates are coming up really soon. It's not a coincidence.


Exactly. Blizzard was hoping stashgate would have fizzled out, its why they've danced around the issue as much as possible up to now.

This thread has had 6 Blizzard posts in the past 24hrs. Suddenly, they're chatty.

I assume Nevalistis has been tasked with putting fires out and placating the players, because unhappy players wont buy tickets. Blizzards motivations couldn't be more transparent.
Yep, not buying into any of this apparent hogwash we have been getting hosed with. Not one bit.

Blizzard needs to wake up.

Not every player is a mindless idiot.

We are smarter than they think.

We are not going to fall for this charade about the stash tabs. Enough is enough.

Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us.

Game on.
04/27/2019 09:17 AMPosted by LordDamien
This. A million times this. If GGG can do it, then surely a big "AAA" company like acti-blizz shouldn't be having any sort of issues with a mere 17 tabs.


PoE is built on a completely different, and much newer, gaming engine. It was designed with the idea that they would sell stash tabs so of course they made sure that feature was in there.

D2 classically had very little storage space, unless you made mule alts. D3 continued in that tradition.

But the real big issue, is that D3 uses an old game engine that would have to be reworked totally to accommodate the stash tab levels of PoE. They CAN do that, but it would be very expensive and probably not worth it for a game that was released 6 years ago.

The way I look at it - if Blizz really wanted our money like people say, they would be selling stash tabs. Not selling them means they likely can't get them working in a stable fashion - not to the extent we want anyway. They are counting on Seasons keeping the number of people with lots of stash tabs down.

No, I am not happy about it as everyone knows. I just wish they would be more open about what is going on with the tech limits. I know Blizz hates talking about it when they can't do something, but it would help people understand. We don't see their internal testing or the metrics they used to come up with this decision. Giving us some clues would help.
IF they really did do everything that they said, I'm satisfied.

As long as they tried with what time and resources they had, they did listen and they did try to change things.

Anyhow, I get the cynic in all of us and we all have tons of salt over many things over the years.

I don't think this will change much in my decision, my 8 year old son wanted to go to blizzcon when he got "old" enough, but I don't think that will be in the cards.

He is picking up D3 on the switch and wants to play it on the PC. So may come back to games I have already bought, but I don't plan on investing any more money into the company until I see some serious change in how we as players/fans/consumers are treated.

My oldest daughter wanted the family to pick up WOW accounts, but I have stonewalled that since blizzcon last year.
04/27/2019 10:50 AMPosted by MissCheetah

The way I look at it - if Blizz really wanted our money like people say, they would be selling stash tabs. Not selling them means they likely can't get them working in a stable fashion - not to the extent we want anyway. They are counting on Seasons keeping the number of people with lots of stash tabs down.


Nah I dont believe that. Someone has to design the interface to buy the stash tabs. Someone has to work on billing. Someone has to handle complaints or chargebacks. Someone has to do some other stuff I'm probably missing.

Blizzard has to employ people to cover all the bases for a system that sells stash tabs, that requires Activision to release the purse strings for D3 and that ain't happening. Theres no guarantee (in Activisions eyes) the revenue from stash tabs would cover those wages. And Activision has written off D3 anyway.

No money is being spent on D3 -- so no staff to support a mtx-style system for D3.
Well i gave the solution. But players are whiners. They are baby whiners they want tabs on the main stash and they dont care about other player low pc gear/memory. So do nothing and let they whine just ignore forum again. Everything you say they whine so ignore them again :)

04/27/2019 04:56 AMPosted by PardalBR
i have a solution for this access memory. There are 2 optional ways:

1 - On act five create the Tyrael warehouse stash. It's a second stash indepent (not shared access between one and other) we could to use after doing a quest to unblock Tyrael stash for we use it.

2 - Make armory/ward robe to work like stash.


04/27/2019 04:56 AMPosted by PardalBR
Goal: With a secondary separated stash a pc player with low memory would not feel the change. And for console the memory loadout would not be huge.

Design: It's like one npc we have a lot of npc but if you put all npc info into just one npc it will cause glitches. For that you create separated npcs, so do the same for stash. So we would own our main stash and one minor stash
04/27/2019 11:41 AMPosted by spirited
Nah I dont believe that. Someone has to design the interface to buy the stash tabs. Someone has to work on billing. Someone has to handle complaints or chargebacks. Someone has to do some other stuff I'm probably missing.


That is kind of an odd argument. They already have an in-game store for D3, already have a store on the website, already have a set means to process payments, and already have CS staff who handle any billing issues. The don't need a single person from the D3 team to be involved when they put something on the Blizzard store. They have a whole team for that already. The only part that is up to the D3 team, would be making the game engine work with the extra tabs. IF that worked, they could just essentially get cash in buckets full if they wanted by selling tabs.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum