Blizzcon Hype confirmed. Engage Hyperbole.

[Djriff]

MousePad's Map Hack was amazing.

Agreed, I think I had it at one point drop an entire Saigon set from Act I the Smith.

[Orangetai420]

That i played only self found and mostly solo, so everyone botting/duping didn't affect me - i had awesome times for straight 9 years. It's actually incredibly strange that an economy system dominated by bot/duping and third party sites is praised as one of the best features ever.

I don't mind a trading system - but it needs to be implemented really good with an itemization system that supports it without making it either mandatory or useless. But i ultimately think that i don't need trading to enjoy a game like Diablo.

Just want to start by saying I respect your opinion and what I have bolded is very valid. I myself played puritan for the same reason - the abundance of dupes and bots. I never liked d2jsp, I couldn't even trade my items on there, even when offering to give my items first and recieve fg after - it was like a high school cliche, either you were around from the start or no one did business with you.

With that being said, I do think that there can still be an economy based around items - as long as there aren't dupes. Bots are the type of thing that will always be there, it's like an arms race with a drug cartel. So that's something we just have to live with in the pc world. I'm sure there are ways to make a D2 style economy work, but I question if its worth the effort. As cool as it was to give a friend a bunch of gear I had stashed, often times they lost motivation to play because I had just given them everything they would have worked towards.

I like the compromise that you can trade items found in your game, it encourages grouping. However, this would work so much better if we didn't have class specific stuff. A couple items are cool (like done in D2... I know, I love this game, probably biased...), but it shouldn't get to the point where you are stacking one class / armor type for maximum drops. Group diversity should be encouraged and not punished.


Adding to this post: I don't praise the economy, I praise the items themselves. I miss runewords, I miss jewels, I miss having sets that were fun but not BiS (trangs!). I agree that the SoJ and later HR economy wasn't the best, but that doesn't diminish how awesome the items were themselves. And if you had the self control to not accept/trade for dupes and play puritan (you mentioned you played this way for 9 years), it can be a really enjoyable experience.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you seriously complaining about a game that cost $10 and has no monthly fee? D2 had plenty of that when it was in it's prime as well, hell I even used a map hack back in the day for SnG's. You can also just play single player and get the same experience, or playing solo online and get the same experience.

Many people also forget they added spam filters in a later patch. If you set them up correctly you can eliminate 95% of bot spam in your games.

[Coldkil]

I miss a lot of stuff about D2 system - it added depth and variation to character builds because it was all about defining a build and getting the gear to support it. There were the cookie-cutter builds and best items but i could run a different build and be fine anyway. There was a sweet spot for everything.

What D3 did wrong were the crap itemization of Vanilla where legendaries and sets were useless, and then they went all the opposite way full throttle with raining legendaries and set that define builds and playstyles leaving zero space and decisions to players. Both systems are flawed at the core, because the item hunt is non-existant.

[Mormolyce]

Personally I expect a D3 expansion announcement, definitely no D4 because D3 is still alive and well.

If there's something bigger, IMO it'll be an unexpected development. Diablo based card game? :P

Now the question is... by "Pushes this genre to new hights" does he mean a new game they're planning to release, or an update for D3 that's going to blow us all away?

That comment could actually be talking about D3 as it already exists.

- - - Updated - - -

I miss a lot of stuff about D2 system - it added depth and variation to character builds because it was all about defining a build and getting the gear to support it. There were the cookie-cutter builds and best items but i could run a different build and be fine anyway. There was a sweet spot for everything.

What D3 did wrong were the crap itemization of Vanilla where legendaries and sets were useless, and then they went all the opposite way full throttle with raining legendaries and set that define builds and playstyles leaving zero space and decisions to players. Both systems are flawed at the core, because the item hunt is non-existant.

In vanilla D2 there weren't any Uniques ("Legendaries") above Normal difficulty so they were literally useless. I think they only added them in LoD? Can't remember.

And the reason so many builds were viable is that the game was ridiculously easy so you could beat it with almost any build.

IMO the D2 people remember is very different to the D2 that actually was.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you seriously complaining about a game that cost $10 and has no monthly fee? D2 had plenty of that when it was in it's prime as well, hell I even used a map hack back in the day for SnG's. You can also just play single player and get the same experience, or playing solo online and get the same experience.

It's pretty impressive that Blizzard still keeps the D2 servers running, but seriously, that game is completely unacceptably broken by modern standards. Even at the time the level of botting and hacking was pretty nuts. And so many aspects of the design are archaic. Took them 10 years to implement a respec feature! When I was playing if you misclicked a talent point, too bad character ruined start again :P

- - - Updated - - -

I don't mind trading either, but how it was done in D3 was too intrusive to gameplay and itemization but with RoS we went to the other extreme and now we are spoonfed gear.

The difference in D2 and PoE is that gear is an augument for the build and spells you chose in a talent tree but your character doesn't feel like a gimp compared to D3. I played D2 and PoE without ever going to trade and i can still level up and clear higher difficulties, maybe slower than traders but the stuff i find is good enough to have fun... not something i could say about D3 Vanilla.... :S

I played fully self-found in D2, had no problems clearing Nightmare... but that's because it had no endgame. Nobody would accept that today.

[Coldkil]

-snip-

More than an xpack, i think it's going to be a major patch - there's nothing that can stop them to implement new content/features/classes with a patch instead of an expansion.

In D2 there were high-difficulty only uniques, even in Vanilla; anyway you're right some of them were really good (SoJ, Frostburn) and the rest basically useless. Or better - they were strong compared with the standard random yellow item, but fallen behind perfect rolled ones and later in LoD crafted items. They had at least a use.
Also you're right about the game being easy, it was more or less bruteforcing stuff since getting to 80 was enough to farm everything and 99 was more fancy than really effective.

I just think that D2 endgame was literally hunting for better items - which took time and was at least interesting to do. I agree fully with the fact that D2 aged not that good and a D2HD won't be as huge as people is expecting (nice for a while, but then it's done) but D3 has deep flaws in the systems too.

D4 is out of question until they want to kill D3 straight. If anything big is coming, it may be a Diablo game but not competing with D3 - something openworld like Skyrim or Witcher 3.

[Deleted]

I loved D3 but when they release nothing more then a plain simple d3 expansion i am not going to buy it. I won't buy a simple D4 either. It has to have mmo elements or i skip anything Diablo related just because i am tired of doing the same thing over and over again.

[Mormolyce]

More than an xpack, i think it's going to be a major patch - there's nothing that can stop them to implement new content/features/classes with a patch instead of an expansion.

In D2 there were high-difficulty only uniques, even in Vanilla; anyway you're right some of them were really good (SoJ, Frostburn) and the rest basically useless. Or better - they were strong compared with the standard random yellow item, but fallen behind perfect rolled ones and later in LoD crafted items. They had at least a use.
Also you're right about the game being easy, it was more or less bruteforcing stuff since getting to 80 was enough to farm everything and 99 was more fancy than really effective.

I just think that D2 endgame was literally hunting for better items - which took time and was at least interesting to do. I agree fully with the fact that D2 aged not that good and a D2HD won't be as huge as people is expecting (nice for a while, but then it's done) but D3 has deep flaws in the systems too.

D4 is out of question until they want to kill D3 straight. If anything big is coming, it may be a Diablo game but not competing with D3 - something openworld like Skyrim or Witcher 3.

I dunno, "hunting" for items consisted of 10 billion Baal runs and a lot of prayer. I played for like, 5 years I think? IIRC the highest rune I ever got was an Um or something. I collected all the sets and uniques, but I never got a single SoJ! The unit of goddamn currency!

I don't know if Blizzard is planning a D2 HD but if they want it to be anything more than a curiosity they'd have to do a lot of fixing IMO. I remember muling items by dropping them on the ground and quickly swapping toons before the game expired, praying I didn't accidentally trigger the fast swapping cooldown... holy crap.

I think if they're going to release HD versions of games they should start with Warcraft 1-3, they're still pretty playable.

[Beefsquatch]

Who else is hoping that D4 (if that's the big announcement) will have gamepad support on the PC? It plays soooooo much better with a gamepad.

[Mormolyce]

Who else is hoping that D4 (if that's the big announcement) will have gamepad support on the PC? It plays soooooo much better with a gamepad.

I don't much care for gamepads for games like Diablo personally, but I don't see why they don't add that support to D3 all the same. Some people like it.

[Deleted]

I exept a major expanion. Since they said D4 is a no go. If no new expantion diablo will be as dead as starcraft compepitive

[Coldkil]

I don't much care for gamepads for games like Diablo personally, but I don't see why they don't add that support to D3 all the same. Some people like it.

That would be really good. Grim Dawn has controller support and the game plays itself very nice, and being able to play it on the couch and big TV via Steam Link is good when i want to just chill out.

I don't think it's really possible for D3 (console versions have different controls/UI and even a roll/dodge button) but i'd welcome the gamepad support.

[Mormolyce]

I don't think it's really possible for D3 (console versions have different controls/UI and even a roll/dodge button) but i'd welcome the gamepad support.

I dunno, maybe they could make it a separate game mode or something.

[Coldkil]

I dunno, maybe they could make it a separate game mode or something.

Not worth the hassle (for them i suppose). But i can be completely wrong and i would like to have it - i have tried already with a pad through 3rd party softwares but it's nowhere as good as the console.

Back on topic - they added in the Blizzcon schedule some ighting talks about Diablo and other games (which will not be available with the virtual ticket fuuuuu). So some more space to tell us things, hopefully good things.

[Demoncrash]

I expect at least the re-release of the current gen optimized D1 and D2 (along with old school Starcraft and Warcraft). The blue post did say they were working on doing that. The re-release would make sense given that it's the 20th anniversary of the Diablo franchise.

Other than that ill gladly take an expansion or D4, though i highly doubt D4 is that far along given they only started recruiting people for it a few months ago.

[Mormolyce]

I expect at least the re-release of the current gen optimized D1 and D2 (along with old school Starcraft and Warcraft). The blue post did say they were working on doing that. The re-release would make sense given that it's the 20th anniversary of the Diablo franchise.

That sounds more like basic engine maintenance like the old Warcraft 2 BNet edition, where they made only minor updates to get it running on modern (at the time) systems but otherwise was the exact same game. Rather than actual "HD editions".

I dunno what to expect, TBH. From the sound of it that job posting wasn't necessarily related to the new Diablo announcement at all.

[Kokolums]

When I played D2, it was all about battle.net. You logged onto battle.net and chatted with people. And those people hopped into D2, or BW, or War3. You might hop in thegame with them to observe and chat. The whole thing was a social experience built around battle.net. The games were good, but the thing that set Blizzard apart from all other game companies was battle.net.

Diablo 3 fails because it is antisocial. 4 players instead of 8 in games. No lobby. I would have thought it was obvious that you take the D2 lobby and expand upon it, not get rid of it. Leaderboards should be in the actual game, accessible from in the game. In d2 you would team up to do trist runs, then tomb runs. Even Baal runs had a social element. People would just stand there and do little, but at least when they were in town, people would drop stuff or sell stuff and you could get something nice. You had enchant games. That was fuyn, making an enchantress and helping to overpower new chars that joined your chant games.

All of that just gets eliminated in D3. D3 steers you into running rifts and grifts. That's an ok system, but its not social at all compared to what D2 had.

[melissabella5]

love it! keep up the good work

[Jokubas]

Antisocial doesn't mean a lack of socializing, it means being unable to socialize in a friendly way.

I don't mean to nitpick, but I think the difference is important. I agree that Diablo 3 has a problem with discouraging multiplayer, but I don't think it's because it has a lack of lobbies or open chats. In my experience, lobbies and open chats tend to be pretty antisocial. It works for some people, but I rarely have a positive experience with them. The most popular chat channels in World of Warcraft, like Trade or Barrens, tend to have the worst reputations for a reason. I'd be willing to bet that the average person doesn't really engage much in it or even notice that it's there anyway (forums, for instance, are always a small fraction of a fanbase). Leaderboards even more so. In my experience, at least the top 100 of any leaderboard are filled with scores so high, sometimes they are literally maxed in whatever game it is. More than that might expect to compete for those spots, but it's still nothing compared to the number of sales that Diablo 3 and Reaper of Souls made.

Not that people don't have a right to appreciate them (and I agree that things like the leaderboard should be accessible in game), but I don't think it makes or breaks the game.

I feel Diablo 3's multiplayer issues come from its scaling. You can't just group with whomever and expect to be competitive with them. This means that even playing with known friends is an exercise in either frustration or simply someone feeling like they don't need to be there and aren't contributing. Trying to find something you can all do and feel like you're contributing is nearly impossible. Even if you always play together, the effect that certain sets or combos can have on your power can throw everything out the window.

[Sorshen]

The updated blizzcon schedule gives me even less hope.

[Coldkil]

Antisocial doesn't mean a lack of socializing, it means being unable to socialize in a friendly way.

I don't mean to nitpick, but I think the difference is important. I agree that Diablo 3 has a problem with discouraging multiplayer, but I don't think it's because it has a lack of lobbies or open chats. In my experience, lobbies and open chats tend to be pretty antisocial. It works for some people, but I rarely have a positive experience with them. The most popular chat channels in World of Warcraft, like Trade or Barrens, tend to have the worst reputations for a reason. I'd be willing to bet that the average person doesn't really engage much in it or even notice that it's there anyway (forums, for instance, are always a small fraction of a fanbase). Leaderboards even more so. In my experience, at least the top 100 of any leaderboard are filled with scores so high, sometimes they are literally maxed in whatever game it is. More than that might expect to compete for those spots, but it's still nothing compared to the number of sales that Diablo 3 and Reaper of Souls made.

Not that people don't have a right to appreciate them (and I agree that things like the leaderboard should be accessible in game), but I don't think it makes or breaks the game.

I feel Diablo 3's multiplayer issues come from its scaling. You can't just group with whomever and expect to be competitive with them. This means that even playing with known friends is an exercise in either frustration or simply someone feeling like they don't need to be there and aren't contributing. Trying to find something you can all do and feel like you're contributing is nearly impossible. Even if you always play together, the effect that certain sets or combos can have on your power can throw everything out the window.

I think you get the nail on first part, but mix up two things on the second.

I agree with you about the whole "socializing" aspect: D2 didn't have an infinietly superior system (it was a lobby with chat channels, while in D3 we have chat channels) yet it worked well because players were willing to use it. You found people asking for advice and people who answered and so on.

But it was 10 years ago.

In the current system of "personal and instant gratification" needed to appeal to a broader audience players generally don't care anymore about other people until it's mandatory to group up or definitely more convenient. In D3 people group through the random system and don't talk at all because they couldn't care less - it's not up to Blizzard to make players talk, it's up to players to talk with others.

The game runs so fast and by now everyone knows already of routes/builds/strategies both because the incredible amount of resources and the fact that the system is not complicated at all (someone did the math, set A is the best, everyone goes for that).

Multiplayer has zero issues: there's nothing like "i'm not contributing" because you're just constantly zerging stuff down for your items so fast it's a cakewalk, and if you're slow this means you're not running the optimal difficulty for you/your group. Add to this that going in group doesn't mean much until you're going 100% optimized and you have the current situation - which was by the way asked by players themselves because first patches showed how running in group was literally hundreds of times better than running solo.

And to be honest, it's fine. D3 is not a strategy game, it's not a raioding game, it's not something challening. It's farming at pure state like it was in D2 and D1 before it. Last seasons in D2 were people doing Baal runs all the time for xp and a few other routes for items, because that's what you needed to do if you wanted to run fast.

D3 has deep issues with itemization and Paragon systems, that's a fact. But the social aspect (which is a very good thing to have) is nt in Blizzard's hands. You cannot force people who simply don't give a s*** to just start talking to each other for no reason at all.