PTR Patch Notes Updated 9 April - Stash Change

General Discussion
Prev 1 57 58 59 64 Next
05/12/2019 09:32 PMPosted by Zero
05/01/2019 08:37 PMPosted by Fenix
RAM? RAM is why you have to gate them behind seasons? RAM is why you can't make them purchasable with gold immediately? this has been the most disgusting excuse from blizzard in the history of blizzard.

pass that on to the devs and whoever calls the shots.

I
AM
NOT
PLAYING
AGAIN.


Good, take the rest of the whiners with you. Blizzard makes $0.00 from continuing seasons. Blizzard makes the same amount from seasonal themes and QoL improvements. This company has given 17 seasons of content for free.

You're all pigs. Greedy, greedy, pigs. If your parents had pulled out in time during your conception the world be a better place. Alas, Blizzard is literally sinking money it does not have to in order to try and make you greedy pigs happy and all you do is gobble up their efforts and defecate complaints.

Blizzard, how about making it so that all characters can reach unlimited GRIFTS and allow all characters to have invincibility and one shot builds so they can get to whatever GRIFT level number breaks the game and then we can all be happy with a game that ends?


1) Blizzard makes money on people who rebuy after bans and a small trickle of new accounts.
2) Blizzard also makes money on people who change their battletag.
3) Blizzard has already made tons of money. Just because there isn't any record of it since it's all reinvested or paid out - doesn't mean they didn't get money.
4) Blizzard doesn't have to maintain the game - I agree. Then they should also take it offline and allow people to host and mod the game as they see fit.
5) The stash thing really has nothing to do with being greedy pigs. You misunderstand the nature of the complaints behind it.
6) Do you enjoy eating slop that is put in front of you? That's what this stash thing is.
7) That being said, being 45 years old, and having millennial kids, I agree with some of your sentiment as a whole.

Q: What are the technical limitations preventing us from adding more stash tabs?

Most objects in the games are actors

(...)

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


That is the most incompetent phrase and reason I heard from a person that talks in the name of Diablo III team (after the "Do you guys don't have phones?").

You are literally insinuating that a big, veteran and professional video game company (Activision Blizzard) had developed an online videogame (Diablo III) on which their developers (you included or not) decided to share network sockets between users containing totally irrelevant serialized data, like for example all the items inside the stash of every player in the party, which in principle couldn't be data consumed by other players (because THERE IS NO REASON TO DO SO, and no viability to see neither share in-game your stash with other players, more than linking an item in the chat or the gears that you are wearing, which are things don't relative to the stash) and then is data not needed for anything to other players.
Don't make me laugh. That would be the nearest synonym of incompetence...

But even if the reason that you gave were true, and even if the data/items consumed by the other users that receives the "actors" of the stash of X player have not a lazy initialization implementation (to only load them in memory when really are necessary to be accessed), even if all the related things were developed in the wrong way and without optimizations, please answer one thing: how many size would occupy in memory all the "actor" objects from a full stash of one player?...

Let's be much generous and let's say every actor/item is represented by a class/structure whose instance occupies 64 kb (which is abnormal to see, and that would be a source-code that is screaming for help to be refactored). Well, If each stash tab have 70 slots and it can be up to 12 stash, we multiply the instance size by 840 slots. It would be around 30 mb to receive the items in the stash of X player. Now let's say this 30 mb of data starts to be transferred asynchronously when a user joins a party, to that user, and only once.

Now, explain me how that could cause "issues" in the memory performance, regardless of it is a console or a PC...

And that would be in the worst case, because probably every "actor" object's instance size occupies between 4 kb to 16 kb, maybe 32 kb being generous if the instance stores/represents many data. But I don't think these devs. are really incompetent and developed their source-code and networking interfaces using the worst programming bad habits and without applying (micro)optimizations in memory performance and packet/data sharing between users. Or at least I don't want to think that. I think they are just liers that tries to obfuscate the real reasons about why they or their company finally decided to avoid increasing the stash tabs for players...

The real reason its obvious for me. It always had been obvious about why Blizard can't give you let's say 20 or 30 stash tabs, and it is not a memory issue. It's just one of the negative things of being an online video game behind a company, because a company will always find to obtain the greatest possible money benefit while the lowest possible expense, and giving free stash tabs to everyone implies to invert money on maintaining more servers (and then more employees) to be able store all the data (all the items that are in your stash); multiply it by hundreds of thousands of users (and fake accounts) and it would be a very big number translated to terabytes. That's the real reason behind it. In this videogame company and in every other.

Maybe you can lie to kids and to adult users that does not have a minimum of knowledge about software, programming and/or networking, but do you really expect to lie to programmers with the absurd reason that you gave about the performance "issues"?...

I'll let give the final words to Abraham Lincoln...

Abraham Lincoln:
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Stash tetris is bloody painful this evening.
Why cant set items be stored in the Wardrobe instead of your stash box and just upgrade items as required?
Just develop a "cold" stash where you can send items to from your current ingame stash (and vice versa) that is only accessible if you leave a current game.
I (and i guess all others players too) don't need access to ALL MY ITEMS at any time in the game with my character I'm playing right now.

Problem solved.

And that "cold" stash could easily handle 1000+ items and more because there is no need to load them all into memory in a running game.
You even could reduce the actual stash tabs back to 10, that would be quite enough....if you have an "out of active game" stash that could easily handle a few thousand items.
04/26/2019 02:07 PMPosted by Nevalistis
Perhaps you could clarify a bit more on this.


You are making the assumption that this is a limitation to server RAM. This is, in no small part, due to the amount of RAM it taxes on the client side. That's something we don't really have control over.

Edit: Fixin' typos.


If you're saying that one of the, if not the overiding reason for not allowing more stash space for all is that it may slow peoples PC down, i think you're underestimating your customers. I can't see that any PC gamer who gets to the point where they need more stash hasn't been gaming for long enough to know their own rig. Warn us that increasing the amount of stash may have performance consequences, then let us decide for ourselves. Charge a billion gold per tab, i for one wouldn't miss it, and make it clear that if we suffer issues we can roll back and lose the new tabs, but with no refund of gold. Again, let us decide. If i could buy four tabs i could delete four mule chars, and be a lot happier that i could see my stuff all in one place, rather than having to load ridiculously named chars just to access a different weapon!
05/13/2019 07:03 AMPosted by Mugsy
Stash tetris is bloody painful this evening.


Actually mine wasn't too bad. But then I salvaged like 98% of everything from Seasons since I had better in non-season already.

I recently went through and completely threw out most of my gear. If it wasn't at least Ancient, it got salvaged. If it was in the cube and an item I can't roll for any character, it got salvaged. If it was ring/amulet with no socket, not ancient, or the ability to make useful for a class, it got salvaged. If it had no useful attribute or power or something to work for a build, it got salvaged.

I have one mule that stores extra leg gems. If I can't fit any on that character, I sell them.

I have two of each class for the most part and make each one store their own gear when not playing that class. I try to keep one stash tab empty in the chest so I can dump a character inventory and enable me to play it. I keep only one set of follower gear for each one that I can use when I want. One set of highest leveled leg gems for actual use as well as one of each potion.

Basically, if I condensed my stash right now, I would probably have 2 or 3 tabs completely empty, possibly more out of my max of 10.

So while it is possible to get by with less, having more would allow me to store some more build layouts for alternate gearing.
Incompetent company that is deaf and arrogant... Who didn't see this coming.... Just release offline version so that COMPETENT FANS can fix this for free....
05/12/2019 09:32 PMPosted by Zero
Good, take the rest of the whiners with you. Blizzard makes $0.00 from continuing seasons. Blizzard makes the same amount from seasonal themes and QoL improvements. This company has given 17 seasons of content for free.

You're all pigs. Greedy, greedy, pigs. If your parents had pulled out in time during your conception the world be a better place. Alas, Blizzard is literally sinking money it does not have to in order to try and make you greedy pigs happy and all you do is gobble up their efforts and defecate complaints.

Blizzard, how about making it so that all characters can reach unlimited GRIFTS and allow all characters to have invincibility and one shot builds so they can get to whatever GRIFT level number breaks the game and then we can all be happy with a game that ends?


Keep defending them and fully believing everything they tell you. It is obvious that they are not telling us the truth about stashgate and why only one instead of five. We know the truth and they know it. But still watch them in the future make some sort of spin on this story that will try to make it believable and people like you will buy it hook, line and sinker. Maybe if Blizz tells you that they want to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge you would believe them and try to buy it from them.

Also wait for the day when folks like you that defend them on issues like this one. Where Blizz decides to tie other things to seasons. Where they could take D4 and tie a whole bunch of new QoL features that they have added for free to the game. Then when a new player tries the game out for the first time. After maybe some years have passed and a whole lot of QoL features have been added. Then when this player notices that he/she has to be about 2+years of seasons just to unlock all of the QoL features that he seen in a streamers video. I am sure that individual might want his money back and uninstall the game due to such things.

Further it seems you are supporting their lies which makes no sense.

05/13/2019 01:24 AMPosted by FabVader
Good.. no one will miss you..


That person didn't say that they are quitting D3. That person just said that they won't be playing Season 17. So that one might either play non season or other games. Who knows they might even do other things than playing games all up to that person.
05/13/2019 03:16 AMPosted by Arkanus
Maybe you can lie to kids and to adult users that does not have a minimum of knowledge about software, programming and/or networking, but do you really expect to lie to programmers with the absurd reason that you gave about the performance "issues"?...


I wonder what does that say about me. Someone that has next to no knowledge of software design and can still see their lie for what it is.
I am never going to be a "hardcore" player. Once I ran a few seasons, and felt the repetitive nature taking hold, I stopped pushing the game on myself. Now, I do buy "expansions" like the Necromancer, though I would hardly call it an expansion. I have no plans, nor desires to start driving myself to be a completionist at all, not on a game that has the worst habit for doing recolors and reruns. So, I understand I will not be receiving any new stash tabs, which I can accept, but also understand, the less space I have to store items just means the less time I will spend on Diablo as what good is running Bounties, rifts and even the story line if all I am going to do is Crunch the items for Mats, Mats I likely will never use again unless you get real and make a real expansion for Diablo 3. So, what you have done is make a repetitive gaming experience that gets really old really quickly and really doesn't offer anything new, while other games push new content and build on a story arc. Kinda sad in my opinion.
05/12/2019 09:32 PMPosted by Zero
05/01/2019 08:37 PMPosted by Fenix
RAM? RAM is why you have to gate them behind seasons? RAM is why you can't make them purchasable with gold immediately? this has been the most disgusting excuse from blizzard in the history of blizzard.

pass that on to the devs and whoever calls the shots.

I
AM
NOT
PLAYING
AGAIN.


Good, take the rest of the whiners with you. Blizzard makes $0.00 from continuing seasons. Blizzard makes the same amount from seasonal themes and QoL improvements. This company has given 17 seasons of content for free.

You're all pigs. Greedy, greedy, pigs. If your parents had pulled out in time during your conception the world be a better place. Alas, Blizzard is literally sinking money it does not have to in order to try and make you greedy pigs happy and all you do is gobble up their efforts and defecate complaints.

Blizzard, how about making it so that all characters can reach unlimited GRIFTS and allow all characters to have invincibility and one shot builds so they can get to whatever GRIFT level number breaks the game and then we can all be happy with a game that ends?


Let's see, I am going to guess you live with your Parents, are like, low to mid twentis and likely don't even have a real vehicle. Let me explain, Blizzard wants money, all Businesses do. Now, they want your money and mine. In order to get MY money, they will have to offer me something I want to pay for. I am well past my prime, but have more disposable cash than I doubt you have seen in your lifetime. You're right and yet wrong when you say Blizzard makes no money off of Seasons. Did you buy the Expansions ? If you did, you Paid for the seasons in advance. If not, you're a hacker. So, I paid for the seasons as well as adventure mode. I paid for server maintenance. I paid for updates and I paid for this game. Tell me to get lost and you'll find I have enough knowledge to stand toe to toe with you. I have a life, I Retired at 47 Years of age. I go camping, fishing, to the beach and the mountains. I can surf and can ski. I have no plans to grind out stash tabs like some others because I leave my house and have fun not staring at a screen all day. Yes, it is true no one would miss me if I left, but, I would bet that the fact I bought my last three vehicles from dealerships with Cash, Blizzard would miss my money, just like they did when I left WoW after WoD came out. I got dozens of "please return to Azeroth", Have a free month on us and so on. I bought five different Blizzard accounts for my family, all "expansions", And would happily pay for another expansion to continue the story line and tie up all the loose ends that "Reaper of Souls" left. While you might not miss us, I bet Blizzard would.
The ideal solution is, as many have pointed out, to create a separate vault/chest that is not loaded into game memory all the time. It would probably have to be situated in a separate area. The items in this separate chest is only loaded when you enter this area. But I guess this would require too much dev effort.

A second solution is to give us more character slots. Currently, with the deluxe edition, there is a total of 17 character slots. This is not enough for many nonseasonal players. (2 toons for each class would make it 14, plus 2 supports (zmonk & zbarb), and the last slot for season.) If you can't give us any extra space, then please give us more character slots. I'd gladly pay to make more mules.

Finally, there is of course the objection that the Chinese server offers many more stash tabs than we currently get, which raises the question of how they are able to overcome the technical limitation in China.
Hey blizz, in 2021 you can purchase a new server setup for us diablo players from AMD. It offers 1.5 exaflops of performance and will solve all stuttering, lag, ram and stash tab issues forever and beyond. Heres the deal:

https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/frontier-radeon-cray-supercomputer-worlds-fastest-nvidia-intel-exascale

Ok 600 million $ aint peanuts but see it as a future investment for the longterm diablo players satisfaction. ;)
Can you hear us now?
05/12/2019 09:32 PMPosted by Zero
This company has given 17 seasons of content for free.


> company has given 17 seasons of content for free.
> company has given 17 seasons of content.
> has given 17 seasons of content
> 17 seasons of content

Implying that tricking players into resetting their progress is content. lmao
I mean really, the stash of all 4 players should not be loaded on a per client basis. Could you imagine if WoW did this? I hope D4 considers the scalability before locking themselves into the same issue.

Realistically these actors shouldn't even be active when the stash isn't active. I imagine it's probably because it considers things like what legendary gems are active in your inventory already, but there are far more efficient ways to accomplish this than to have them as active actors like utilizing flags.
05/10/2019 05:46 PMPosted by Bastich
Nev, while ya here. How come China have more stash tabs? Do they have better RAM?


05/10/2019 06:20 PMPosted by harlekin
And what about the discrepancy with the ability to buy stash tabs given to players in China?


This is false. Diablo III in China is free-to-play, and players there have the ability to purchase the same maximum amount of tabs. All other regions are instead able to earn those tabs through Season. That is the only difference. The per-player maximum is identical.

I see where this conversation is going and I understand the frustration. We all want there to be a different resolution. Unfortunately, we have exhausted our alternative options, at least for the time being. If that changes, you all will be the first to know.

We know how much the community wants this particular improvement, and it's why we tried so many different ways to make it work. I truly wish I had better news, and I hope that, despite the stumbles we've had, you enjoy the other quality of life improvements and changes Season 17 and Patch 2.6.5 have to offer.
05/13/2019 03:28 PMPosted by Nevalistis
05/10/2019 05:46 PMPosted by Bastich
Nev, while ya here. How come China have more stash tabs? Do they have better RAM?


05/10/2019 06:20 PMPosted by harlekin
And what about the discrepancy with the ability to buy stash tabs given to players in China?


This is false. Diablo III in China is free-to-play, and players there have the ability to purchase the same maximum amount of tabs. All other regions are instead able to earn those tabs through Season. That is the only difference. The per-player maximum is identical.

I see where this conversation is going and I understand the frustration. We all want there to be a different resolution. Unfortunately, we have exhausted our alternative options, at least for the time being. If that changes, you all will be the first to know.

We know how much the community wants this particular improvement, and it's why we tried so many different ways to make it work. I truly wish I had better news, and I hope that, despite the stumbles we've had, you enjoy the other quality of life improvements and changes Season 17 and Patch 2.6.5 have to offer.


Nev,
Has Blizzard considered extra character slots? This should not increase in game actors.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum