are cooldowns fun?

General Discussion
Prev 1 2 3 4 12 Next
03/07/2012 08:38 PMPosted by D3BETA
Yeah...but..this is Diablo THREE.


so diablo 2 wasn't great and super fun?


It was indeed. Diablo 3 can't be different and still great and super fun as well???
WoW invented cooldowns?

zombie dogs explode for 200% damage each, imagine summoning 3, having them run to a boss, and exploding them, then just summoning more, non stop. It's about adding different types of skills into a game, instead of 'firebolt, fireball, icebolt, ice blast, glacial spike' all being almost identical, they have more powerful and different attacks. I'm not exactly for the 30+ cd either, but all that means is that I won't pick any, because that's my play style, and if you don't like them you can find 6 others without a cd as well. That's the great part about it!



you never actually played the first 2 diablos did you


I don't think you understand what I was saying. I was saying there are only so many different things you can do before skills become repetitive, in any games, if you break down the code, it's essentially the same. By introducing cool downs, it allows for different types of attacks that couldn't be used in the original sense, like Call of the Ancients, or Archon. These skills are implemented in ways that are different, so it gives a very different feel of using these skills than others.
WoW invented cooldowns?

zombie dogs explode for 200% damage each, imagine summoning 3, having them run to a boss, and exploding them, then just summoning more, non stop. It's about adding different types of skills into a game, instead of 'firebolt, fireball, icebolt, ice blast, glacial spike' all being almost identical, they have more powerful and different attacks. I'm not exactly for the 30+ cd either, but all that means is that I won't pick any, because that's my play style, and if you don't like them you can find 6 others without a cd as well. That's the great part about it!



you never actually played the first 2 diablos did you


And why should we be limited to 10 year old concepts? Even though it's even older -- D2 had cool downs (called "casting delays") for a number of their spells. And frankly when they did change over to cooldowns, a lot of the spells got a lot more impressive since they could do higher damage and retain the same DPS.

What's more is we have 6 active skills to use... what's the point of that if you have one or two spam spells?

I suggest you head over to PoE to see how truly exciting a non-cool down based game is. You might enjoy it, but it gets really stale really quickly.
report this account

get this site taken down

d3eden.com

http://i.imgur.com/wW75v.png
Cooldowns: They are really fun, fun like shoving a fork directly into your eye.


Thank you.
Cooldowns: They are really fun, fun like shoving a fork directly into your eye.


Thank you.


If by shoving a fork into your eye you mean sipping a nice cool ice tea on a warm summer afternoon then yes I would agree.
I LOVE cooldowns.

why? because it gives the ability for the creators of the game to make nuke abilities.

I want to have to think about when to use certain thigns, when to hold on to them for latter not just spam everything constantly. Cooldowns make the game less mindless button mashing and more fun!
03/07/2012 06:33 PMPosted by D3BETA
I don't think its about balance, it think its about adding a system from world of warcraft


Yes, WoW invented cooldowns. Good job.

03/07/2012 06:23 PMPosted by D3BETA
but is it fun?


I don't think inherently waiting to use a skill is fun, but it certainly reinforces skill-based play as it's a restriction you have to plan around and use in tactical ways. Obviously resources are the other big limiter, but we like our resource systems to be able to be gamed a little, and if they can be gamed you're essentially opening the spam gates. That's fine for some abilities, but not for others. So the question really comes down to should we ensure every skill can be used back to back, or do we throw another limitation on their use so they can stay awesome?

Diablo II was a great game, but I don't think anyone can argue the combat model was really deep or engaging. People played because they wanted awesome characters, not because it felt really cool to spam blessed hammer millions of times and kite monsters around. For Diablo III we think we can have awesome characters and deep and engaging combat, and we're not going to get there by just copying the previous game.
I don't think its about balance, it think its about adding a system from world of warcraft


Yes, WoW invented cooldowns. Good job.

but is it fun?


I don't think inherently waiting to use a skill is fun, but it certainly reinforces skill-based play as it's a restriction you have to plan around and use in tactical ways. Obviously resources are the other big limiter, but we like our resource systems to be able to be gamed a little, and if they can be gamed you're essentially opening the spam gates. That's fine for some abilities, but not for others. So the question really comes down to should we ensure every skill can be used back to back, or do we throw another limitation on their use so they can stay awesome?

Diablo II was a great game, but I don't think anyone can argue the combat model was really deep or engaging. People played because they wanted awesome characters, not because it felt really cool to spam blessed hammer millions of times and kite monsters around. For Diablo III we think we can have awesome characters and deep and engaging combat, and we're not going to get there by just copying the previous game.


I think it (D3's current model) adds depth too. Because if all spells are spammable, then it forces you to choose the one you want to use most, rather than having a combo of some powerful CD spells mixed with regular/signature ones.

And to your first point: WoW borrowed from D2, and D3 borrows from both. So it's win win :D
a cool down itself is not fun, but it helps make the thing as a whole fun.
03/07/2012 11:17 PMPosted by Bashiok
I don't think its about balance, it think its about adding a system from world of warcraft


Yes, WoW invented cooldowns. Good job.

but is it fun?


I don't think inherently waiting to use a skill is fun, but it certainly reinforces skill-based play as it's a restriction you have to plan around and use in tactical ways. Obviously resources are the other big limiter, but we like our resource systems to be able to be gamed a little, and if they can be gamed you're essentially opening the spam gates. That's fine for some abilities, but not for others. So the question really comes down to should we ensure every skill can be used back to back, or do we throw another limitation on their use so they can stay awesome?

Diablo II was a great game, but I don't think anyone can argue the combat model was really deep or engaging. People played because they wanted awesome characters, not because it felt really cool to spam blessed hammer millions of times and kite monsters around. For Diablo III we think we can have awesome characters and deep and engaging combat, and we're not going to get there by just copying old ideas.


Lol Bashiok is not amused with WoW comparisons anymore...

One thing I am slightly curious about is item modifiers that affect cool downs. I know we have passives already to help but I think some interesting gameplay choices could be made between adding damage to a skill or a small reduction in CD (I.E 8 or 9 second CD on leap attack instead of 10)

Would really branch out itemization IMO (with careful balancing ofc)
03/07/2012 11:17 PMPosted by Bashiok
I don't think its about balance, it think its about adding a system from world of warcraft


Yes, WoW invented cooldowns. Good job.

but is it fun?


I don't think inherently waiting to use a skill is fun, but it certainly reinforces skill-based play as it's a restriction you have to plan around and use in tactical ways. Obviously resources are the other big limiter, but we like our resource systems to be able to be gamed a little, and if they can be gamed you're essentially opening the spam gates. That's fine for some abilities, but not for others. So the question really comes down to should we ensure every skill can be used back to back, or do we throw another limitation on their use so they can stay awesome?

Diablo II was a great game, but I don't think anyone can argue the combat model was really deep or engaging. People played because they wanted awesome characters, not because it felt really cool to spam blessed hammer millions of times and kite monsters around. For Diablo III we think we can have awesome characters and deep and engaging combat, and we're not going to get there by just copying the previous game.

I felt cool throwing my hammers...
Short answer: Yes. Cooldowns are fun.

Longer answer: Attaching a cooldown to a spell means that you can use it with less frequency, but this is usually balanced with its effects. Because you can't 'herpderp' and smash your face into a keyboard and get the best effects constantly, you have to play the game to get the most out of it.
You would complain if there were no cooldowns, everything felt samey, and some skills lacked any significant meaning because there were other spells just as good.
Like cooldown-based skill swapping?


Because you can swap skills out that are on cooldown, right?

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum