Diablo 4 to have NO item Trading and will have Guarantied Class Focused Drops...

[Edge-]

if you dont think poe loses most of its player the week after league start, you are VERY mistaken. its exactly the same as d3 in that regard.

also something being good or bad is purely subjective. no one can decide what is good vs bad, it will be different for everyone. so it being bad is just your take on it and holds no weight.

It loses a lot of concurrent players, actual populations are difficult to determine. But that's fairly standard for online games when they get new content/are released in general. Big spike of concentrated interest and then CCU numbers level out over time.

[The Oblivion]

It loses a lot of concurrent players, actual populations are difficult to determine. But that's fairly standard for online games when they get new content/are released in general. Big spike of concentrated interest and then CCU numbers level out over time.

im aware. thats why him faulting d3 for it but not poe makes no sense. it happens to both games. it happens to all games like you said. wow has that problem. ffxiv. destiny. call of duty. even fotm games like valheim will lose most players after the initial burst.


even comparing total numbers make no sense, poe is a game receiving full blown expansions, it would make sense for it to have a higher total player count, but id bet my life it loses nearly the same % of players just as quickly as a d3 reset does.

[Gorsameth]

Everyone keeps using this word (bolded), but it's incorrect. They do not need to balance loot around trade, and they shouldn't. Just like they didn't balance loot around the RMAH - they simply had a vastly different philosophy on loot that was hilariously wrong because a lot of the people leading the development of D3 learned all the wrong lessons for why D2 was so successful and lasted so long.

Again, PoE, a F2P ARPG, exists with loot drops balanced around SSF (solo self found). You can progress more than fine without ever trading in PoE, as you can in just about every ARPG I've ever played, regardless of if it featured trading or not.

And the drop you're talking about would be the result of the Smart Loot system and has nothing to do with trade. Even without trade Smart Loot is pretty "meh" IMO. I like it to a point, but getting few/no drops for other classes is similarly lame as hell. Sometimes you just wanna farm gear for an alt you're starting on so you can bypass the early grind on a weak character, yaknow?

You keep bringing up PoE being balanced around SSF while still having trade but you can't ignore that trade itself in PoE is balanced by being a miserable experience.

Blizzard, despite plenty here probably not agreeing with it, tends to make high quality games. Its not their way to balanced drops around SSF and then let trade be balanced by the trade system being shit.
If the trade system in PoE was not shit but an actual AH for example, it would likely suffer the same way early D3 suffered.
Barrier of entry is its own, very powerful balance mechanic.

[Edge-]

You keep bringing up PoE being balanced around SSF while still having trade but you can't ignore that trade itself in PoE is balanced by being a miserable experience.

Yes, that's GGG's design intent and they want it to be a clunky experience to discourage heavy use. Which is fine!

Blizzard has a huge range of options for how to handle trading while discouraging its use as the primary method of gear progression, allowing a trading economy and associated groups to form without making the game about "trade or die" is what I more keep getting at. PoE is an example of how to fairly effectively achieve this (hence the nonstop complaints from users about how poor the trade experience is, heh).

Blizzard, despite plenty here probably not agreeing with it, tends to make high quality games. Its not their way to balanced drops around SSF and then let trade be balanced by the trade system being shit.

Sure, but they also do a lot of really obviously dumb stuff. See: D3's initial design and things like the RMAH. The current Blizzard is very much not the "old Blizzard" that delivered banger after banger.

If the trade system in PoE was not shit but an actual AH for example, it would likely suffer the same way early D3 suffered.
Barrier of entry is its own, very powerful balance mechanic.

Again, D3's drops weren't bad because of the RMAH. I linked it earlier, but go watch the GDC talk. They were bad because Blizzard fundamentally misunderstood why items were valuable to folks in D2 and consequently their entire philosophy on item drops as total trash. The RMAH existing was simply a coincidence, not the cause.

And again, I'm all a system of trade that has limitations while still allowing for even just basic sharing of a few pieces of semi-valuable gear between friends. That's mostly what I care about, sharing gear with my group of friends that play ARPG's when we can't all be playing at the same time. That's historically been, and still is, a big draw for all of us and benefits us all.

[Unseen Guest]

Oh yes, silly me, the hype that led to it being the fastest selling game of all time when it released was based entirely on it's own........

And D2 was successful because of D1. And D3 is a great game. So what's your point? Are u simply admitting you are a D2simp?

- - - Updated - - -

So D3 has officially sold over 31M units. D2 4M. D3 sold 10M in its first year. Are you claiming the D2 fanbase, who review bombed the shit out of D3 at launch repeatedly bought a game they considered shit for a year? Could it be possible that D3 brought a much larger audience to the franchise? And if the game was so bad, so utterly panned from day 1, ho did it go on to sell 30M copies in the first 3 years, and over a million on Switch 6 years later?

I get it. You and others don't like D3. But to try to claim things like if it weren't for D2..., subtract 4M from 31M, you still nearly 7 times as many new players than all of D2. The facts are D2 obviously helped drive initial sales. WoWs cross promotion did s lot as well. But D3 would not have had continued success 6 years post launch if it were a bad game. Not to your liking sure, but good enough to overcome a review bomb campaign and constant online attacks to be ine of the best selling PC games of all time.

Facts!

D1 = awesome game
D2 = awesome game
D3 = awesome game

Basically, hating D3 is one thing and I can respect your opinion that you hate D3. However, hating D3 and constantly drowning us in hare filled comments and constantly criticizing it over and over just by using the "it's not a D2 clone" makes you a D2Simp and nothing more. And it invalidates your arguments because of ur filthy bias towards D3.

Grow the fuck up.

- - - Updated - - -

So you are going to cry over the one feature the diablo community BEGGED and PLEADED for from Blizzard for the first like 2-3 years of D3's existence? That's genuinely hilarious, you prove the fact that the entirety of blizzards game community are nothing but a bunch of entitled babies that will cry over anything just for the sake of crying.

You want an ARPG with a trading system, go play Path of Exile with all the other whiners.

Thank you! The D2Simps can stay away from D4, we don't need them. They can fuck right off with their bs.

Meanwhile, the rest of us can enjoy the very awesome looking D4 while the D2Simps can continue crying about nonsense.

[Beefhammer]

Basically, hating D3 is one thing and I can respect your opinion that you hate D3. However, hating D3 and constantly drowning us in hare filled comments and constantly criticizing it over and over just by using the "it's not a D2 clone" makes you a D2Simp and nothing more. And it invalidates your arguments because of ur filthy bias towards D3.

Grow the fuck up.

We see this on the official site all the time. D3 haters with an agenda to shit on D3 and the people who play it. Then they do the call for civility pearl clutching these types always do when they get punched back. These people are the snowflakiest of snowflakes, similar to ex WoW players who still come around these boards to shit post. Like move on dude.

[Th3Scourge]

The loot 2.0 model in Reaper of Souls works the best for me, and a heck of a lot of other people. As I went over extensively in prior posts, I have negative interest in poking around any in-game or out-of-game auction house for the stuff I need. I'd rather be playing the game and enjoying myself. The only trading I have any interest in or desire to see, even though I'll never use it, is a system where group members can trade drops that dropped while grouped. Beyond that, I don't see any particular value to item trading. Getting rare drops you need for a build can be better-addressed by adjusting drop rates. Getting the right currencies for crafting/content use is the same. Trading is just a shitty cover so you don't need to balance things appropriately, in both of those cases.

well yeah they did adjust the drop rates alright. Now you finish a rift and you get an explosion of orange and green beams. Riveting

[Endus]

well yeah they did adjust the drop rates alright. Now you finish a rift and you get an explosion of orange and green beams. Riveting

As opposed to the explosion of beams from goblins, or regular bosses? It really only gets to "explosion" levels when you're already at endgame anyway, and need that kind of drop rate for any reasonable chance of something useful.

[Edge-]

well yeah they did adjust the drop rates alright. Now you finish a rift and you get an explosion of orange and green beams. Riveting

I mean yeah...lootsplosions are rad. ARPG's are games about farming specific rolls on gear, not just getting a drop itself. That's what builds more longevity, you can make your build work just find with the key uniques/set pieces/rare items (I find D3's focus on sets super boring IMO) but you're always chasing the version with "god rolls".

[Th3Scourge]

As opposed to the explosion of beams from goblins, or regular bosses? It really only gets to "explosion" levels when you're already at endgame anyway, and need that kind of drop rate for any reasonable chance of something useful.

well yeah you can apply the loot pinata explosion to whatever example you like.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean yeah...lootsplosions are rad. ARPG's are games about farming specific rolls on gear, not just getting a drop itself. That's what builds more longevity, you can make your build work just find with the key uniques/set pieces/rare items (I find D3's focus on sets super boring IMO) but you're always chasing the version with "god rolls".

I checked out when they added the ancient items. Whatever item I was chasing was always disappointing if it didn't drop as an ancient. It was as bad as titanforging

[Stickiler]

I find D3's focus on sets super boring IMO

That's one of my favourite parts about D3, it really gives me the WoW tier sets feeling of like, having an incomplete set and working until I've got the full set, and feeling the massive boost in power when it's completed.

[Endus]

I mean yeah...lootsplosions are rad. ARPG's are games about farming specific rolls on gear, not just getting a drop itself. That's what builds more longevity, you can make your build work just find with the key uniques/set pieces/rare items (I find D3's focus on sets super boring IMO) but you're always chasing the version with "god rolls".

Sets could've been fine, if they focused on 2-3 item sets that were all over and basically just balanced against legendaries. I agree that the D3 model is pretty darn boring, especially since the sets have such stupidly overpowered boosts they provide literally exponential gains, where normal legendaries are merely linear. The only alternatives at high ends are very particular builds with particular ancient items and the legendaries to "activate" not wearing set gear. It makes swapping gear and builds way more awkward than it should be, because you wouldn't ever want to swap out of a set unless you're dropping basically all of it, and they're so specific they basically determine the abilities you need to use along with that set. The interesting part of gearing is always the cubed powers and other legendaries around the set, and that's a shame.

Gief legendaries that do stuff equivalent to single set bonuses, so they can be hotswapped individually.

[Unseen Guest]

We see this on the official site all the time. D3 haters with an agenda to shit on D3 and the people who play it. Then they do the call for civility pearl clutching these types always do when they get punched back. These people are the snowflakiest of snowflakes, similar to ex WoW players who still come around these boards to shit post. Like move on dude.

Facts! So sad but true

[RCA]

For those who like to present sales/player base data when comparing d2 and d3 it's a horrible argument on many levels. 1998 vs 2012 is miles apart in so many ways. Total global internet usage in 1998 is 5% of the global population, fast forward to 2012 its 33% (now it's close to 66% fyi). Tie this in with global population increase and there's another variable to the argument. Also, d2 was designed for one platform and only one date of release, while d3 had multiple dates of release and platforms. Grapes to melons people, please argue differently if you want to make a point.

OT: depending on how you value your time and playing method is how you will be affected. Never was handed anything from friends or family that was game breaking. If I got a Ber rune but need Jah instead to complete my Enigma, then a one-to-one trade is perfect way to accomplish. I get what, and I'm sure they made that trade for good reasons too. Sucks to see that botting and over monetization of virtual items curtails trading. But then again, I'll refer back to my first paragraph...1998 is not the same as 2022.

[glowpipe]

For those who like to present sales/player base data when comparing d2 and d3 it's a horrible argument on many levels. 1998 vs 2012 is miles apart in so many ways. Total global internet usage in 1998 is 5% of the global population, fast forward to 2012 its 33% (now it's close to 66% fyi). Tie this in with global population increase and there's another variable to the argument. Also, d2 was designed for one platform and only one date of release, while d3 had multiple dates of release and platforms. Grapes to melons people, please argue differently if you want to make a point.

OT: depending on how you value your time and playing method is how you will be affected. Never was handed anything from friends or family that was game breaking. If I got a Ber rune but need Jah instead to complete my Enigma, then a one-to-one trade is perfect way to accomplish. I get what, and I'm sure they made that trade for good reasons too. Sucks to see that botting and over monetization of virtual items curtails trading. But then again, I'll refer back to my first paragraph...1998 is not the same as 2022.

But there was a lot more competition and a hell of a lot easier for people to make informed decisions to buy a game or not. Way easier to get information if the game was good or not. And People over time made d3 and ros enter the top 10 most selling games of all time list

[Nymrohd]

For those who like to present sales/player base data when comparing d2 and d3 it's a horrible argument on many levels. 1998 vs 2012 is miles apart in so many ways. Total global internet usage in 1998 is 5% of the global population, fast forward to 2012 its 33% (now it's close to 66% fyi). Tie this in with global population increase and there's another variable to the argument. Also, d2 was designed for one platform and only one date of release, while d3 had multiple dates of release and platforms. Grapes to melons people, please argue differently if you want to make a point.

OT: depending on how you value your time and playing method is how you will be affected. Never was handed anything from friends or family that was game breaking. If I got a Ber rune but need Jah instead to complete my Enigma, then a one-to-one trade is perfect way to accomplish. I get what, and I'm sure they made that trade for good reasons too. Sucks to see that botting and over monetization of virtual items curtails trading. But then again, I'll refer back to my first paragraph...1998 is not the same as 2022.

Did anyone do that? I think sales value were quoted to show that game perception changed significantly with RoS and that the game sold really well.

[gurete]

There seems to be about 2/3 of people really hating the leaked "no trading" info, and 1/3 of people saying they are fine with that.

Also, the people who say "it's a good change", in almost every case, do not make any lengthy explanation. Honestly, I seem inclined to think that this audience seem to be the younger guys , short attention span, that will play anything as long as it doesn't require much effort.

It would be a big surprise if they choose to cater to that audience again, after the d3 experience. Taking the no-trading route in RoS made a better short-term game ; in hindsight, probably was one of the main factors of the inability of the game to retain their MAUs, as it evolved into a shallower game, removing the trading endgame which led to a longer endgame. So, choosing a different path would have been a better route long term; this is speculation, but based on numbers, so we could say it's an educated guess.

No doubt these considerations are easily extracted by Blizzard economists, after all they are the ones designing in-game economy.

But yet, this is Blizzard, and every decision they've been taking lately seems ill-informed. Still, I cannot see how this decision would help the game sell more copies or have a robust source of income post-launch, quite the opposite.

Considering this comes from a pre-alpha state of game, prone to changes and risky approaches, I don't think that it will be kept unchanged. Blizz wouldn't want to cripple their own game and send loads of older gamers with full wallets (maybe most of the Diablo fan crowd?), straight into PoE2.

[Veggie50]

There seems to be about 2/3 of people really hating the leaked "no trading" info, and 1/3 of people saying they are fine with that.

Also, the people who say "it's a good change", in almost every case, do not make any lengthy explanation. Honestly, I seem inclined to think that this audience seem to be the younger guys , short attention span, that will play anything as long as it doesn't require much effort.

It would be a big surprise if they choose to cater to that audience again, after the d3 experience. Taking the no-trading route in RoS made a better short-term game ; in hindsight, probably was one of the main factors of the inability of the game to retain their MAUs, as it evolved into a shallower game, removing the trading endgame which led to a longer endgame. So, choosing a different path would have been a better route long term; this is speculation, but based on numbers, so we could say it's an educated guess.

No doubt these considerations are easily extracted by Blizzard economists, after all they are the ones designing in-game economy.

But yet, this is Blizzard, and every decision they've been taking lately seems ill-informed. Still, I cannot see how this decision would help the game sell more copies or have a robust source of income post-launch, quite the opposite.

Considering this comes from a pre-alpha state of game, prone to changes and risky approaches, I don't think that it will be kept unchanged. Blizz wouldn't want to cripple their own game and send loads of older gamers with full wallets (maybe most of the Diablo fan crowd?), straight into PoE2.

There are a LOT of assumptions inthere mate.

1) The assumptions about the demographics of those disagreeing with you
2) MAU's would have stayed higher with trading in ROS
3) Choice between Diablo 4 and PoE 2 is binary

You MIGHT be right, but it is definitely a guess based on your feelings, not substantiated by facts ^^

[gurete]

There are a LOT of assumptions inthere mate.

1) The assumptions about the demographics of those disagreeing with you
2) MAU's would have stayed higher with trading in ROS
3) Choice between Diablo 4 and PoE 2 is binary

You MIGHT be right, but it is definitely a guess based on your feelings, not substantiated by facts ^^

Yes, there are assumptions. As I pointed on my post. They are not based on guts or feelings, though, but on numbers and metrics. I attempted to explain on each of them my logical reasoning to reach that conclusion (but probably fail, seeing your response).

Allow me to give it a second try explaining how I reach those "assumptions" that seem to bother you.

1) Demographics on "I like no trading" against "trading" are based in 2 points:

First, the fact that older gamers, the ones who started with the Diablo franchise and are now 30+ if not 40+, would prefer a game with trading purely because it is what we came to know and like (D2).
Second, the "I like no trading" folks in this thread, and blizzard forums, seems to be less likely to provide a extensive response than those who are pro-trading. There's no way to prove that other than reading this and other threads on the subject, which I largely did. And there's the assumption that people who do not provide a long post to "defend" their position, tend to be younger because they are less likely to be bothered to write it. It's a fact that younger generations favor free gratifications against those requiring an effort, while the older generations do think twice before taking the shortest route. There are a multitude of psychological studies proving so.

2) MAUs would have stayed higher with trading in RoS.

This is pure speculation because we cannot change the past. But , as I mentioned, it's based on numbers. The general game perception of d3 improved with the changes brought by RoS? Undoubtly so. But, did it carry over an influx of players, an increase on the retention rates? Not at all. We could discuss why the player retention rates were considerably worse with RoS than they were with the original D3 (there is likely to be a number of factors, not just one) but I honestly think that removing trading -almost entirely- was one of them, if not the biggest offender. As I said, it created a shallower game experience, reduced the time to reach endgame, instant gratification. The result? less time spent in game per user. Translated into today's gaming? Less season passes sold.

3)Choice between D4 and PoE is binary.

It isn't, you can play both, but fact is that most people are gonna favor one against the other. And, specially when the games have a progression system, you are likely to attach to one of them instead of playing them both. So, here you are playing with semantics, even probably being aware that they are being branded as rival games, trying to appeal the same ARPG-MMO crowd, and that due to the time (and money) investment, it is not easy to jump from one to the other as if you were in a shooter game.

[ParanoiD84]

That's one of my favourite parts about D3, it really gives me the WoW tier sets feeling of like, having an incomplete set and working until I've got the full set, and feeling the massive boost in power when it's completed.

Now days you get a full set for any given class completing the seasonal objectives witch you can do in a couple hours then you farm the same set given it's the best set for your class witch most are next season but better stats, im going to play next season though but end game is mostly that and pushing higher rifts if you enjoy that.

In going to try out the next season for a couple days as i usually do before getting bored. I hope d4 have a better end game for sure or more then rifts.