[PT2] Diablo IV - What do we expect?

General Discussion
06/08/2019 07:05 PMPosted by Orrion

Pathfinder Kingmaker is a modern game with monsters that has 30 AC on hardest difficulties on earlier game, making your attacks very unlikely to hit and is an amazing game. Hit/Miss make the combat fells more tense and interesting. I was playing with an sorcerer of undead bloodline and an enemy rogue invisible sneaked to my cleric, i casted finger of the death(that works differently on pathfinder than dnd) and was an tense scene. Will he pass the "check" and kill my cleric? Or be OHKilled? The randomness of D&D/Pathfinder is what make the combat more tense and immersive.


We're talking about ARPGs. That kind of moment-to-moment, turn-based decision making simply doesn't exist, nor should it be forced into existence. It has its own presence already in games where it works well.
Notice how he de-emphasized the "A" earlier in response to me (and maybe elsewhere). He only cares about the RPG elements. I'm accused by some of being to focused on RPG realism by some folks when I make suggestions, but really I'm only concerned about facilitating different play styles and different gearing routes to faciliciate that. I care about the action though, and he seems to ignore it and think that mechanics from games with a completely different pacing have a place in Diablo. Special materials and stuff to cast a spell like LV is always going on about... I don't see any place for that in an ARPG.

Diablo 3 is an Arpg. He wants an aRPG. Diablo should be an ARPG.
I hope there will be sex scene
<span class="truncated">...</span>

We're talking about ARPGs. That kind of moment-to-moment, turn-based decision making simply doesn't exist, nor should it be forced into existence. It has its own presence already in games where it works well.
Notice how he de-emphasized the "A" earlier in response to me (and maybe elsewhere). He only cares about the RPG elements. I'm accused by some of being to focused on RPG realism by some folks when I make suggestions, but really I'm only concerned about facilitating different play styles and different gearing routes to faciliciate that. I care about the action though, and he seems to ignore it and think that mechanics from games with a completely different pacing have a place in Diablo. Special materials and stuff to cast a spell like LV is always going on about... I don't see any place for that in an ARPG.

Diablo 3 is an Arpg. He wants an aRPG. Diablo should be an ARPG.


No, i an not asking for make an game that you spend more time on dialogs and investigating than on combat like vtmb, nor be able to convince the final boss to not fight like on arcanum. Reagents to cast CERTAIN spells exist even on very mainstream games such as wow. And i an talking about few spells with that cost. Same with XP requirements. And IMO this should be in place more often on long duration DEFENSIVE spells, or maybe an ultra powerful offensive spell spells or some things like permanently buff to an item, etc.

Note that on Diablo 2, there are an spell that "consumes" an item. Is called Iron Golem. The Golem absorbs the item propriety. I was talking about reagents for similar spells. Not as if you need to constant micromanage then because it goes against ARPG spirit.

If an similar spell comes to IV with an option to spend XP to increase the golem level, it will be bad??? Or maybe an animate weapon spell like Path of Exile has that you can spend XP to make the weapon lasts until killed.

06/08/2019 10:00 PMPosted by Zetec
I hope there will be sex scene


An warlock class that can summon succubus similar to wow should be amazing
Well, I could correct you there, wow removed reagents from spells several years ago, due to it being tedious and costly. Ammo was removed aswell because hunters forgot to buy them all the time. That change was almost unanimously loved by everyone.

In games like baldurs gate, reagents didn't really exist as it did in its tabletop counterpart. With the pace of gaming on pc being a lot faster than sitting down with some friends on a Friday evening and having a dnd session.
06/08/2019 11:34 PMPosted by Rashiel
Well, I could correct you there, wow removed reagents from spells several years ago, due to it being tedious and costly. Ammo was removed aswell because hunters forgot to buy them all the time. That change was almost unanimously loved by everyone.


Loved by everyone? Then why wow classic is being more popular on twitch views than retail wow?

Anyway, i think that an better solution for wow, is : instead of removing ammo, making many types of ammo available. So, if you are with an bow, you can use broadhead arrow to deal more "damage", or bodkin arrow to pierce more armor. Or maybe expensive and heavy ammo like explosive arrows since is a fantasy game. DDO for example(another mmo) has an endless amount of craftable arrows : https://ddowiki.com/page/Arrow

For reagents, the problem is that for example, Warlock has only "soul shards" and the weakest mob to the toughest mob, everyone soul "worth the same", IMO if soul shards depends of the enemy type, and spells can be strengthened by shards, it would be much better.

The best example of "sacrificing an item to cast an spell" that i saw on a video game, was Iron Golem from D2. I din't mentioned the reagent cost to bring an boring micro management, less than 5% of skills should require it.

06/08/2019 11:34 PMPosted by Rashiel
In games like baldurs gate, reagents didn't really exist as it did in its tabletop counterpart. With the pace of gaming on pc being a lot faster than sitting down with some friends on a Friday evening and having a dnd session.


On tabletop, i only played 3.5e/Pathfinder. Don't know about spells on BG "edition". Anyway, even DDO(Dungeons and Dragons online) has reagents. There are metamagic that can make you able to cast spells without reagents called Eschew Materials, but expensive materials to cast stoneskin still need to be purchased ( https://ddowiki.com/page/Stoneskin ) and is one less feat that you can have, so is not an popular metamagic.

Ultima Online too, is an mmo and all spells require reagent(din't had internet on UO time, so i an not sure about this information but found this site https://uo.com/wiki/ultima-online-wiki/skills/magery/magery-spells/)

-----------------------------

Anyway, since we are talking about diablo, an very action focused game, i think that an system like Dragon's Dogma, where there are unlimited "basic" arrows, but explosive/poisonous/etc arrows can be purchased and weights, is the best one and can be adapted to some spells. So, if Iron Golem comes back for eg, you can create an generic weak iron golem or make your iron golem absorbs an item propriety.

That way, you don't have the micro management and have all customization that an ""reagent""/item can proportionate.
06/08/2019 09:39 PMPosted by UngivenFame
06/08/2019 07:05 PMPosted by Orrion
We're talking about ARPGs. That kind of moment-to-moment, turn-based decision making simply doesn't exist, nor should it be forced into existence. It has its own presence already in games where it works well.

[/quote]Notice how he de-emphasized the "A" earlier in response to me (and maybe elsewhere). He only cares about the RPG elements. I'm accused by some of being to focused on RPG realism by some folks when I make suggestions, but really I'm only concerned about facilitating different play styles and different gearing routes to faciliciate that. I care about the action though, and he seems to ignore it and think that mechanics from games with a completely different pacing have a place in Diablo. Special materials and stuff to cast a spell like LV is always going on about... I don't see any place for that in an ARPG.

Diablo 3 is an Arpg. He wants an aRPG. Diablo should be an ARPG.


Expect, if you've read about the development of Diablo then you know it was originally designed as a turn-based game as it was inspired by tabletop games like MtG and D&D. It was only after convincing from Blizzard South did David Brevik test a zero turn time build and realize that was the direction the game should go. So yes having real-time action was a key ingredient of the genre defining formula, but by no means was it the central focus of the design. No one ever looked at D1/D2 sprite action and thought, "This is why I play." Same could be said about old school Runescape.

I just don't see many RPGs out there sustaining success due to the design of their action.
Want to know a skill I never used in D2? Iron Golem. Want to know why I never used it? Because the idea of sacrificing a good item just have a pet obliterated by boss design literally crafted to do increased damage to them was not my cup of tea.

Want to know why I never used ethereal items? Because I found the concept of temporary gear atrocious and the further pushing of the need for Zod or praying for a durability repair mod did not suddenly make the same mod neat.

Want to know why I hated consumable ammo? Because it took up inventory space for no other reason than existing. It placed a higher priority on scavenging if you risks only running with a quiver in the off-hand. Other classes largely didn't have to deal with this, while more easily benefiting from more charm/pick-up space.

Want to know why I hated Attack Rating? Because it contributed to caster dominance much like them not having to care about weapons as much as melee characters. You also had more subversive mathematical nuggets like your Defense rating tank because you ran instead of walked, which further disadvantaged melee characters who needed to move ASAP from target to target or to avoid telegraphed incoming damage. It self-created a problem that, like similar to Ethereal items, could possibly be alleviated by an Ignore Enemy Defense mod, but inevitably forcing it as a necessity to specific builds doesn't make it a meaningful layer of complexity. But more in general, I'd argue D2 wasn't "there" yet to really handle the fluidity of a more active hit/miss motif we have today, but I'm pretty sure you could drop AR as a stat in D2 and the people who would complain, even during the game's prime, would be minimal and at best a bunch of contrarian purists.

More broadly, just because something was done in the good ol' days doesn't mean it's proper to do it now. Appealing to tradition is fine when some certifiable merits can be derived of the behavior, but to circle back to EXP loss and reply to Toad at the same time, what is the teachable moment when you just chop off a percentage of gains? It's easy to bark that actions should have consequences, but at what point is the act of failure enough? D2 had the problem of bosses not being instanced, which meant you could just die over and over and over and over whittling them away to death. Pragmatically, if you had to do this, it meant your build wasn't up to par. A simple level up was unlikely to fix that, either, unless it happened to correspond with a build defining unique equip. But if that was the case, you probably should've just taken a slight detour to gain that level instead of forcing progress. D3 "solved" this "problem" by instead making bosses instanced, where if you didn't win, that's it. You'd have to start the fight over. And if it kept happening, you'd need to figure out why. Maybe it was a mechanical misunderstanding. Maybe you needed better gear to kill before or better push through certain phases. Perhaps lowering the difficulty was in order. None of this demanded taking actual in-game resources away from the player, though, and holding your nose up guffawing about integrity is a sham defense. GRs also have the timer as a hard cap for failure. Want to argue that people shouldn't be able to die in GRs to make them more in-line with boss fights? I won't agree, but can at least respect the desire. Want to better reward people for not dying? Hmm, that's sounding more like an incentive to git gud.

Basically, you don't have to be jerks to your players just to make a game good. That can include the above, or things like bloating the grind exponentially just because. In the off chance you favor certain sorts of challenges, then that's something you can impose upon yourself. Dragging everyone else down in certain masochistic principles just tends to come off as a mix of mean-spirited and petty, because how dare someone more casual maybe not be so far away in strength.
06/09/2019 02:09 AMPosted by Saidosha
Want to know a skill I never used in D2? Iron Golem. Want to know why I never used it? Because the idea of sacrificing a good item just have a pet obliterated by boss design literally crafted to do increased damage to them was not my cup of tea.


Iron Golem is not the best golem to tank bosses, but this doesn't means that he is useless. For example, he can be immune to lightning and poison with some synergies(resist all) and can reflect damage back to the attacker, also absorbs item proprieties.

You don't need to sacrifice the most expensive runeword to have this effects. You can sacrifice an item that you will sell anyway, but will produce an golem with very high defense ratting and resistance to other elements.

I made an Iron Golem that has 82% resist fire, 80% cold and was immune to lightning and poison with a lot of defense ratting with an item that worth nothing to trade or to my build. Eventually he got killed, but was an cool experience.

Necro is the class with most "situational" skills on D2.

06/09/2019 02:09 AMPosted by Saidosha
Want to know why I hated consumable ammo? Because it took up inventory space for no other reason than existing.


Again, as i've said, make the "basic" ammo unlimited, but allow you to purchase more expensive ammo.

06/09/2019 02:09 AMPosted by Saidosha
Other classes largely didn't have to deal with this, while more easily benefiting from more charm/pick-up space.


Of course not. They don't use an weapon that requires ammo to "work". What is the next? On FNV ammo weights on hardcore and .50 BMG ammo is very heavy. This made my favorite weapon(anti materiel rifle) into an situational weapon, but this makes sense.

And ammo is expensive IRL, Argentina is one of the most famous countries from Hunting and believe on me. If you wanna hunt, Rent an .30-06 rifle to hunt Patagonian Boars will be very expensive. Even blackpowder guns tends to be relative expensive to shoot. No, i don't own an firearm, but i visited firing ranges IRL. I understand that micromanage ammo is not an fun experience, so i an suggesting ammo only for "special" arrows.

06/09/2019 02:09 AMPosted by Saidosha
? Because it contributed to caster dominance much like them not having to care about weapons as much as melee characters.


Don't use ammo, don't need to worry about ammo
Don't use weapon, don't need to worry about weapon

That is not hard to understand. And most builds that can solo Ubers are builds that use Procs like Crushing Blow and most casters have to worry about immunities, except Druids that can deal physical and cold/fire damage at the same time.

But defense ratting makes sense. As i've said, is unlikely to hit an heavily armored enemy. An better solution is to make casters worry about chance of hitting too. An lv 1 necro able to curse an prime evil with 100% garantee success makes no sense.

06/09/2019 02:09 AMPosted by Saidosha
but to circle back to EXP loss and reply to Toad at the same time, what is the teachable moment when you just chop off a percentage of gains?


Punishing failure and making the combat more tense. The XP loss on D2 is minimum and you have an chance of regaining most of XP loss.

06/09/2019 02:09 AMPosted by Saidosha
That can include the above, or things like bloating the grind exponentially just because.


You don't need to grind on any Diablo game, unless you wanna be the top leveled player of the "ladder" on d2 or wanna do high GR on D3. You can experience countless of hours of fun and
Diablo 1/2 are isometric aRPG's, D3 is just an loot hunt game.

And diablo 1/2 isn't a loot hunt game?
pray tell where you get the loot you want to play with without having to go find it

You gain items randomly on Diablo 3. So is technically possible to spend hundreds of hours and not get the item that you desire. And on D2, there are an "attack ratting"

Same is true for D1 and D2 as well, I've spent hundreds of hours trying to get the big sets in D2 and haven't completed one set yet
06/08/2019 06:23 PMPosted by L0rdV1ct0r
Of course is. To make the player thinks before use the spell.

The fact that casting a spell will cost you xp, and you think that it's a good idea to have to make people think about casting it because of the cost is enough for 99.99% of players to never use that spell and is just a wasted slot in the game that no one will ever use and the players will be asking why did you put in a spell that no one will use because it costs them experience and why didn't you put in spells that people can actually use
Wow classic being popular can be for a multitude of reasons, ammo and reagents wasn't one of them.

If you did play back then, you would know the hassle of playing a class that were forced to have those consumables. Essentially, if you didn't have ammo as a hunter, you were pretty f'ed.

Having different ammo types becomes a costly venture, and separates the ones who can afford ammo, the ones who can't, and the ones who play a different class to avoid it.

It's not enhancing the game, it's just making playing an archer a chore.

The faster people progressed in the game, the more annoying ammo and reagents became.
To digress a bit from the Victor bashing in this thread, I think a passive skill system in which you can put points into would be really nice, with two different kinds of passive skills:
  • one type that improves your existing build by giving offensive, defensive, tactical or utility bonuses (like +x% crit chance per point, x% dodge chance per point, x% chant to stun enemies on hit per point, x% increased movement speed per point, etc) for every point that you spend in it up to a maximum amount.
  • one type of passive skill that completely chances how your character or a mechanic works (like making you immune to all CC effects, your skills dealing increased damage but also costing life, Cheat Death effects, or a passive that increases your damage against enemies that are close to you, but at the same time reducing your damage to enemies that are further away, etc...), which cost several points to unlock.
  • https://imgur.com/OGsyXRA

    I am not saying that I expect such a system from D4 or that D4 should have this kind of system, but I just think it would be really cool if D4 had something like that.
    06/09/2019 03:01 AMPosted by Steve
    pray tell where you get the loot you want to play with without having to go find it


    I can complete both without looting, only the end game of LOD is very loot focused.

    06/09/2019 03:01 AMPosted by Steve
    bout casting it because of the cost is enough for 99.99% of players to never use that spell and is just a wasted sl


    Yes. Nobody uses wish on D&D and soul costing HExes on dks2 /sarcasm

    06/09/2019 04:07 AMPosted by Rashiel
    If you did play back then, you would know the hassle of playing a class that were forced to have those consumables. Essentially, if you didn't have ammo as a hunter, you were pretty f'ed.


    This is part of being an hunter. If you disagree, try hunt Boars without ammo and see what happens.

    Ammo management should be an part of a Hunter's life just like Mana management is an part of Mages and soul shard management for warlocks.

    06/09/2019 04:07 AMPosted by Rashiel
    Having different ammo types becomes a costly venture, and separates the ones who can afford ammo, the ones who can't, and the ones who play a different class to avoid it.


    No, ammo as any consumable will be used in situations where they worth their costs. Is not as if i an proposing to force hunters to grind for 10 hours to fire an single shot of incendiary ammo or something similar.

    Should be expensive enough to make the use of then against regular enemies be an bad idea and cheap enough that use this type of ammo in certain situations, an good idea
    But that still doesn't make mechanical sense in an aRPG setting, the pace of the game is much higher than your average rpg, and the rate you fire arrows are so incredibly intense you go through stacks upon stacks just to clear a dungeon.

    So if I can nitpick, but does it make sense that an Amazon from d2 carries 5x200 arrows?, I doubt it. But that was what was required to play, because the rate of fire was at that level. Unless she had a huge backpack, I doubt she would bring all of it around with her.

    Mana and soulshards are usually created by the caster, or drawn from enemies you kill. In this setting, it just becomes a way of generating and spending resource. But having to port back to town to buy arrows, just breaks that game play.

    And having special ammo creating a gap between rich and poor, remember that if you bot and have money, you will be able to play at top performance at all time, while someone who doesn't bot grinds just to have a chance.

    Special ammo would work, with either cooldowns or high resource cost, but never with buying said arrow, atleast in an aRPG setting.
    06/08/2019 06:51 PMPosted by Gr8Hornytoad
    Some people just prefer an environment where achievements are earned and failure has consequences. I believe the word integrity sums it up rather well. I doubt they even teach that word in school anymore. To busy making sure everyone feels special and nobodies feelings get hurt.


    Well !@#$ing said! Don't care too much, man. Most are beyond salvation.
    It's just too ironic this is all about a game called 'Diablo'.
    Pathetic example of mainstream garbage madia, right there.
    This franchise used to be serious, that was a long time ago.
    Don't give up all hope. Someday a game worthy of the title will be made.
    06/09/2019 02:09 AMPosted by Saidosha
    It's easy to bark that actions should have consequences, but at what point is the act of failure enough?


    So the act of dying to monsters and bashing your head against RNG should be the only consequences? Define act of failure in regards to any other aspect of the game. To me, regardless of what your building, whether it be a house or a rpg character, if you make a mistake repairing it should take effort and time proportional to the size of the mistake. There should be a cost. Not just for realism but for integrity and longevity of gameplay.

    It seems you would like to remove everything that you find “tedious” in this type of game. Since you seem to be into simple solutions how about you switch genres instead of suggesting this one be hollowed out further.

    This franchise was gutted when all it needed was repair and innovation.

    06/08/2019 07:05 PMPosted by Orrion
    And I'd argue that randomness doesn't make combat tense and immersive. If all your work means nothing due to factors outside your control, that's hardly a rewarding experience.


    You gain items randomly on Diablo 3. So is technically possible to spend hundreds of hours and not get the item that you desire.


    We were talking about combat, dimwit. Items being awarded randomly has nothing to do with combat.

    And yes, spending hundreds and hundreds of hours and not getting rewarded for it was one of the major problems with D2 and D3 up until about a year after RoS.

    06/08/2019 07:05 PMPosted by Orrion
    If that rogue in your example was of a much higher level than you, FoD would simply fail and/or inflict minimum damage.


    Rogues has low fortitude. Even if he has a lot of con, in most cases, the spell will hit him.


    You're missing the flippin' point, which is that in DnD settings your level and your opponent's level matters and dictates a lot of things. There's a reason your GMs don't have you facing Ancient Black Dragons at level 1 - because you'd get your @ss handed to you.

    06/08/2019 07:27 PMPosted by Osiris
    i hate everything to do with D1 and D2 not a game so if any of these are in D4 id not even waste my time id prob just uninstall and go find another new game to enjoy


    Only one question. Why do you hate D1/D2? They are very successful and critical acclaimed games.


    D3 is a successful and critically acclaimed game. Doesn't stop you from hating it.
    06/09/2019 06:43 AMPosted by TobiasPeste
    06/08/2019 06:51 PMPosted by Gr8Hornytoad
    Some people just prefer an environment where achievements are earned and failure has consequences. I believe the word integrity sums it up rather well. I doubt they even teach that word in school anymore. To busy making sure everyone feels special and nobodies feelings get hurt.


    Well !@#$ing said! Don't care too much, man. Most are beyond salvation.
    It's just too ironic this is all about a game called 'Diablo'.
    Pathetic example of mainstream garbage madia, right there.
    This franchise used to be serious, that was a long time ago.
    Don't give up all hope. Someday a game worthy of the title will be made.


    Ah, yes, because things like restarting naked in town after dying on level 15 Hell in Diablo 1 was SUCH a good mechanic.

    No, seriously, it was awesome needing to use my very limited inventory space to take an extra set of gear with me from game to game and dump it in town just in case I happened to die.
    06/09/2019 12:46 AMPosted by L0rdV1ct0r

    Anyway, since we are talking about diablo, an very action focused game, i think that an system like Dragon's Dogma, where there are unlimited "basic" arrows, but explosive/poisonous/etc arrows can be purchased and weights, is the best one and can be adapted to some spells. So, if Iron Golem comes back for eg, you can create an generic weak iron golem or make your iron golem absorbs an item propriety.

    That way, you don't have the micro management and have all customization that an ""reagent""/item can proportionate.
    Iron golem could work like that. But what point would the ammo have in Diablo context where you have a SKILL that imbues a javalin with poison or a SKILL that imbues an arrow with exploding fire?

    06/09/2019 01:35 AMPosted by Animule
    Expect, if you've read about the development of Diablo then you know it was originally designed as a turn-based game as it was inspired by tabletop games like MtG and D&D. It was only after convincing from Blizzard South did David Brevik test a zero turn time build and realize that was the direction the game should go. So yes having real-time action was a key ingredient of the genre defining formula, but by no means was it the central focus of the design. No one ever looked at D1/D2 sprite action and thought, "This is why I play." Same could be said about old school Runescape.

    I just don't see many RPGs out there sustaining success due to the design of their action.
    Except, I know that it was initially turn-based but that isn't how it was released and it was the great game that it is because of that decision to go action oriented, and D2 was never turn based at any point. Real-time is a "key ingredient of genre defining formula" - we agree. I'd say that is A central focus of the design. There is a reason I play ARPGs like Diablo, Torchlight, Titan Quest, and Grim Dawn and not Ultima or Dark souls or Elder scrolls or DnD or any of these other games that LV is always trying to force into Diablo... slaughtering hordes of enemies with different heroes that I can build and equip in different ways. I don't see how one can say that action is not sustaining success of an entire subgenre of RPGs.
    06/09/2019 06:57 AMPosted by Gr8Hornytoad
    06/09/2019 02:09 AMPosted by Saidosha
    It's easy to bark that actions should have consequences, but at what point is the act of failure enough?


    So the act of dying to monsters and bashing your head against RNG should be the only consequences? Define act of failure in regards to any other aspect of the game. To me, regardless of what your building, whether it be a house or a rpg character, if you make a mistake repairing it should take effort and time proportional to the size of the mistake. There should be a cost. Not just for realism but for integrity and longevity of gameplay.

    It seems you would like to remove everything that you find “tedious” in this type of game. Since you seem to be into simple solutions how about you switch genres instead of suggesting this one be hollowed out further.

    This franchise was gutted when all it needed was repair and innovation.


    Let me put it another way, then. You don't want content. You want time sink. At this point, you're only going to be happy when someone dying in a game literally destroys their computer because how dare that scrub not know better.

    But more succinctly, this also highlights your lack of understanding of human behavior and a complete inability for you to succeed as an educator. You likely think the whole "sink or swim" style works for you because that's probably unfortunately all you've ever known, while others who've learned differently have obviously been coddled, entitled, whiny sh*ts. You'll parade a line of reasoning that the world has to be cruel because the world is cruel, when it's more like the world is cruel because some a-holes have to keep flexing and not use the bean in their head that functions as a brain substitute to consider alternative paths. You say you want innovation and repair, but leave out the asterisk to that claim. No, it didn't innovate or repair in the way you desired, and so we get something akin to the agist bravado of men actually being more like men in the D2 days, while time and time and time and time again belittling D3 players for daring to like certain changes under the mantra of "gutting" or the like.

    At this point, just admit you're afraid you're a minority. I know, it's scary realizing others don't think like you do or that learning how to behave differently after so long thinking you were set can be difficult, but this delusion some of you seem to have that a new game not made to your precise specifications is somehow a game you can not play is simply not true. It's on you to lighten up. It's on you to be receptive. I dare say, perhaps you're the one in need of repair. Remember, these ARE still meant to be games. Not work. Not life lessons, despite potentially teachable moments. Not even a way of life. Don't be that toxic fanboy, as much as it already seems to be too late for some.
    06/09/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Saidosha
    You want time sink


    I want a feeling of accomplishment and pride that comes from sinking time and effort into something.

    06/09/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Saidosha
    you're only going to be happy when someone dying in a game literally destroys their computer because how dare that scrub not know better.


    Desperate exaggeration, pretty much a straw man.

    06/09/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Saidosha
    You'll parade a line of reasoning that the world has to be cruel because the world is cruel, when it's more like the world is cruel because some a-holes have to keep flexing and not use the bean in their head that functions as a brain substitute to consider alternative paths.


    My line of reasoning has always been accountability and integrity. Equality is BS. If everyone is on an equal playing ground there won’t be equality. It’s up to the individual. It’s not cruel and not everyone that is successful is a flexing a-hole.

    06/09/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Saidosha
    You say you want innovation and repair, but leave out the asterisk to that claim. No, it didn't innovate or repair in the way you desired,


    The asterisk is they removed a lot of features and replaced them with nothing. They repaired by removing and cheapening the game experience.

    06/09/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Saidosha
    bravado of men


    Ah great, sexist explanation. Have never mentioned women or race nor will I. I believe it’s foolish assumption on your part, pretty much par for the course.

    06/09/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Saidosha
    At this point, just admit you're afraid you're a minority. I know, it's scary realizing others don't think like you do or that learning how to behave differently after so long thinking you were set can be difficult, but this delusion some of you seem to have that a new game not made to your precise specifications is somehow a game you can not play is simply not true. It's on you to lighten up.


    I’m not afraid of anything to do with games. I’m disgusted with the current trajectory the gaming industry is on from which this franchise is definitely not immune. While I would prefer features more true to the first 2 games, my beef is with the complete lack of integrity and longevity. And no I will not conform to mediocrity.

    06/09/2019 09:06 AMPosted by Saidosha
    Remember, these ARE still meant to be games. Not work. Not life lessons,


    That should not stop them from being deep, challenging, immersive experiences.

    Join the Conversation

    Return to Forum