Worth buying now?

[Kelimbror]

The concept of giving an item to your friend when you're done with it, it's gone and the 2h window does not help that.

Instead of giving friends hand-me-downs to instant win you actually have to play with them through the content and then can earn gear and trade together. *GASP* how awful! It's like they actually want you to play with your friends in a meaningful way.

[Bigbazz]

Instead of giving friends hand-me-downs to instant win you actually have to play with them through the content and then can earn gear and trade together. *GASP* how awful! It's like they actually want you to play with your friends in a meaningful way.

That's like saying, "instead of giving your friend your old guitar to give him a starting point, you can go to work together and earn money so he can buy his own!".. It still doesn't change the fact that Diablo, a series heavily based around trading has now killed off trading. You can justify it in any way you want but I've yet to see someone justify it in a way that makes sense.

You speak as if you could not already do what you're talking about, what you speak of was already part of the game... You're praising the fact that they didn't restrict you further, give yourself a clap.

[Kelimbror]

That's like saying, "instead of giving your friend your old guitar to give him a starting point, you can go to work together and earn money so he can buy his own!"

It's actually nothing like that...

It still doesn't change the fact that Diablo, a series heavily based around trading has now killed off trading. You can justify it in any way you want but I've yet to see someone justify it in a way that makes sense.

Justify it? It doesn't need to be justified. You can trade in group play and no longer play a lobby trade/black market internet trade game. So emphasis has been placed on actually playing the game and playing in groups. Considering how they have stated that the emphasis of this game is certainly on multiplayer and thus why you can't play offline, at least their design decisions are in line for a change. It's just matter of fact, so no justification is needed. It is the way it is. Like it or don't play.

You speak as if you could not already do what you're talking about, what you speak of was already part of the game... You're praising the fact that they didn't restrict you further, give yourself a clap.

Yes, explaining to you how the game works which you seem to not understand at all is certainly 'praising' anything. The more you know...

[Bigbazz]

It's actually nothing like that... Justify it? It doesn't need to be justified. You can trade in group play and no longer play a lobby trade/black market internet trade game. So emphasis has been placed on actually playing the game and playing in groups. Considering how they have stated that the emphasis of this game is certainly on multiplayer and thus why you can't play offline, at least their design decisions are in line for a change. It's just matter of fact, so no justification is needed. It is the way it is. Like it or don't play.

Yes, explaining to you how the game works which you seem to not understand at all is certainly 'praising' anything. The more you know...

I don't understand at all?

Saying something like that does not make it true, how can you read from my posts that I don't understand how it works? I clearly perfectly understand how it works, are you trying to be difficult just for the purpose of arguing and disagreeing with someone? How about instead of trying to be the smart ass you reply with something meaningful?

The facts

1. They have killed off trading, trading as we have traditionally known it since Diablo 1. Being able to pass an item over to another player in the same game within 2 hours like in World of Warcraft is not trading as we know it in Diablo.

2. Yellow items being able to be traded is fine, but the fact is that yellow items are very weak in comparison to Legendaries, only Legendaries have real value in 2.0, effectively making them (yellows) useless.



Tell me how it is a negative factor to be able to permanently be able to trade those items with people from the same game, instead of just 2 hours? How is it a negative thing that I can give my weapon to my friend when I'm finished with it, the friend who would then recieve it as an upgrade?

[Kelimbror]

They have killed off trading, trading as we have traditionally known it since Diablo 1. Being able to pass an item over to another player in the same game within 2 hours like in World of Warcraft is not trading as we know it in Diablo.

Great. That is also irrelevant as it is a design decision. Trading still happens, but you are now required to participate in group activities to do it. Trading has not been 'killed off'. The method for trading has changed. Calm down with the doomsaying and ad hominem. It's tacky.

Tell me how it is a negative factor to be able to permanently be able to trade those items with people from the same game, instead of just 2 hours? How is it a negative thing that I can give my weapon to my friend when I'm finished with it, the friend who would then recieve it as an upgrade?

It removes players from gameplay, which is the entire purpose of games. It was objectively bad design to have trading function the way it used to from a pure gameplay standpoint. It might have been enjoyable, but switched to a lobby auction/social networking system which isn't really part of a game by technical and inherent design principles. Now they have found a design that fits within the actual gameplay, which means by an objective means the design has been improved. It has the added benefit of completely eradicating the black market that sold items on the internet, which is brilliant. Everything else is irrelevant, subjective and non factual statements.

Whether you enjoy it or not is of no value to me. We're speaking about game design of which your feelings don't actually factor. With that being said, I register your repeated complaint. My suggestion is to not pay or play the game going forward. I'm not sure what else you are expecting here.

[Dhrizzle]

Kelimbror, I'm not sure how you can say removing (or restricting if you prefer) trading is "objectively" better. They could have the game exactly as it is now, but allow all items to be traded or even keep the Auction Houses. To me that would be better as I'd be playing the exact same game but with more options as to what to do with my junk. To some people it would be worse, because the temptation of getting easy items through trade or real money would be too great and they'd effectively ruin the game for themselves (as many people did in d3v).

The fact that two groups have different opinions make it "subjectively" better or worse. In fact objectively I'd say it's worse to remove (or restrict if you prefer) trading, because it is perfectly possible to ignore that feature without taking options away from other players.

[Hottage]

Bought it two days ago. Lvled to 60 in under 14 hours. Now I am paragon 30 DH and loving it.

I've had it since release and my highest character is Level 60 (24) Wizard, what the fuck am I doing wrong? -,-

[Kelimbror]

Kelimbror, I'm not sure how you can say removing (or restricting if you prefer) trading is "objectively" better.

Because I'm discussing game design and theory which is a real and not subjective thing. If something is an external system and becomes integrated with actual gameplay, then objectively it is better game design as gameplay is the primary objective of a game. I don't expect many people here to step outside of their opinions enough to discuss ideology and tenets of design appropriately, but it is what it is. I'm not going to stop speaking truth just because people get fussy about it.

[Solidsteel]

Yeah I got it launch night and rushed to 60 then quit after becoming bored. Two weeks ago when the new loot system came out I began playing again and I absolutely love this game now. I promptly unsubbed from wow and might not even return for WoD now that I think about it.

[Dhrizzle]

Because I'm discussing game design and theory which is a real and not subjective thing. If something is an external system and becomes integrated with actual gameplay, then objectively it is better game design as gameplay is the primary objective of a game. I don't expect many people here to step outside of their opinions enough to discuss ideology and tenets of design appropriately, but it is what it is. I'm not going to stop speaking truth just because people get fussy about it.

Game design has to be a subjective thing because it depends on the audience surely. If you're arguing that it would be better for the AH to be more seamlessly integrated with the game I'd agree, but you seem to be saying that it is objectively better to remove features that people find an enjoyable part of the game, and if that's what your rules on game design say I think they might be wrong.

[Kelimbror]

Game design has to be a subjective thing because it depends on the audience surely. If you're arguing that it would be better for the AH to be more seamlessly integrated with the game I'd agree, but you seem to be saying that it is objectively better to remove features that people find an enjoyable part of the game, and if that's what your rules on game design say I think they might be wrong.

You are confusing 'part of the game' with 'gameplay'. Removing something that wasn't integral to the gameplay and figuring out a way to add it into gameplay is design improvement. Whether you find an activity not related to gameplay fun is irrelevant.

[Fhi]

Ultimately it's no good being able to trade yellows when yellows are useless compared to the BOA Legendaries.

So you should say that instead of saying "Blizzard killed trading". You just don't want to trade yellows, or see trading yellows as useless. I don't claim to know the drop rate for legendaries at 60 (died at p19 and had to start over), but unless legendaries drop like candy, yellows will still be traded. Some legendaries don't even have mainstat on them - I've sharded quite a few legendaries because of that - so it's possible that an equal-level decently-rolled yellow would be superior.

Saying "blizzard killed trading" is just exaggerating.

[Dhrizzle]

You are confusing 'part of the game' with 'gameplay'. Removing something that wasn't integral to the gameplay and figuring out a way to add it into gameplay is design improvement. Whether you find an activity not related to gameplay fun is irrelevant.

That isn't what they're doing though, the ability to trade any piece of equipment with any player at any time is not being integrated into the gameplay it is being removed. The fact it is a feature that you (and I, for that matter) didn't use much or find interesting doesn't change the fact that for some people it was a part of the gameplay that is being removed.

[Littleraven]

The game started out awful, not gonna lie. But the team listened and lately, with the release of patch 2.XX, it honestly feels the way it should have felt from the start. I plan to preorder the expansion largely due to my experience in the new patch compared to launch. I was one of the people that played for a couple months and said to hell with it.

pretty much this. it wasnt THAT awful at launch but it definitely was broken. they have made leaps and bounds since then and patch 2.0 was another HUGE improvement to the game. the loot system is much better and the overall systems changes make a lot of big QoL changes. honestly if you are into dungeon crawlers at all id say pick it up. things are only going to get better once the expansion drops.

- - - Updated - - -

Only Legendaries are account bound, but after 2 days playing the game since the patch only Legendaries have any value whatsoever in 2.0. The 2 hour window is useless in the long term, they should allow all accounts present in the game to always be able to use the item, not just for 2 hours. Diablo is a trading and sharing game, that aspect is gone.

The concept of giving an item to your friend when you're done with it, it's gone and the 2h window does not help that. Yellows that drop in the world are really weak compared to Legendaries, they simply cannot spawn with anywhere near as much stats and the Yellows that are good are BOA crafted items.


Ultimately it's no good being able to trade yellows when yellows are useless compared to the BOA Legendaries.

this is no different than D2. if you played D2 for ANY length of time you would know in order for a legendary to even be worth ANYTHING it had to be a certain one. people seem to forget how broken trading was in D2. short of you having a stone of jordan (in the old days anyway) or a ton of rare runes you weren't getting jack. it was very rare that you would actually trade an item for another item.

i seem to remember having to trade upwards of 40 SoJs later on for anything "good" legendary. (unique back then). while i do think its a little drastic to cut trading down to what they did, i 100% understand why they did it. its the same reason they made the AH in the first place. to cut out the 3rd party sites. trading in diablo has ALWAYS been sort of a broken thing. not because of blizzard but because of the sheer nature of people being greedy as all hell.

i mean i get that people want to be able to give their friends hand me downs but this isnt a perfect world. the ONLY thing i could see them doing is adding some kind of system that allowed you to trade openly with real ID friends but even that could be gamed to "break" the system.

[Saphyron]

defiently worth it.

I loved it at the start of the game and when paragon came out. kept some breaks in between. but i can with a straight face say I LIKE D3 AT THIS MOMENT.

Can't wait for RoS so i can get a crusader. Almost have 2 of each classes in 60 atm.

[Kelimbror]

it was a part of the gameplay that is being removed.

Actually it was not a part of gameplay. You did not play the game when you did these things. Much like hanging out in a chat room is not playing a game, lobby trading is not gameplay. I don't know what the technical term for it can be called, maybe a feature or experience at best, but it was not gameplay. It altered gameplay, but was not gameplay. This will sound like an argument of semantics, but you have to understand the fundamental principles to understand that adding trading of legendaries within groups inherently motivates gameplay. This is the key difference. You have to play the game to perform this function. Similarly, buying an item of the RMAH was not a part of gameplay. It's the exact same concept.

[Valeron]

I've just recently started playing again (just a few days ago in fact) and I really like all of the changes. I think it is just $20 now? Definitely worth it for that price.

[schwank05]

Patch 2.0 got me back into the game and I never really got into the vanilla game (got to 60 then quit). Its definitely better but don't get the console version, I don't think its running 2.0

The console version has all the loot 2.0 stuff, just not the Paragon stuff. When It finally comes out on PS4 and Xbox fail it will be the same as PC version.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't get all the trading whining going on, I mean I played the other night with some friends and if it wasn't an OMG this thing increases my DPS by 10+% I gave it to one of them if they got a better upgrade from it. I mean come on really what is so hard to grasp about that. Play with friends, makes it 100% more enjoyable anyway.

[Dhrizzle]

Actually it was not a part of gameplay. You did not play the game when you did these things. Much like hanging out in a chat room is not playing a game, lobby trading is not gameplay. I don't know what the technical term for it can be called, maybe a feature or experience at best, but it was not gameplay. It altered gameplay, but was not gameplay. This will sound like an argument of semantics, but you have to understand the fundamental principles to understand that adding trading of legendaries within groups inherently motivates gameplay. This is the key difference. You have to play the game to perform this function. Similarly, buying an item of the RMAH was not a part of gameplay. It's the exact same concept.

It definitely seems to be semantics, at what point are you actually engaging in "gameplay"? I would say that the core gameplay is running around and killing monsters, anything else can be considered part of the "meta-game" (but I'm not sure I'm using that phrase correctly). Examining your items and deciding whether to keep them, salvage them or trade them is not much different whether you are trading with your group members or through some other means. However since 2.0.1 players who want to trade are massively restricted in their options whilst nothing has been implemented to replace that particular aspect of the game, not just AH trading but also giving hand-me-down legendaries to friends.

I understand why Blizzard have removed trading from the game. From a psychological point of view some people find it less enjoyable to grind their own gear when they could go the easier route of trading, but Blizzard made a judgement call and decided it would be overall better to favour those players over the ones who played it for the trading aspect. It doesn't mean they made the game objectively better.

[Kelimbror]

It doesn't mean they made the game objectively better.

Again you are confusing is an assessment of quality or worth to an individual as equal to objectively discussing game design. You are referencing subjective metrics. I could care less whether any individual likes the change and feels the game is more fun for this discussion. That's something entirely different.