Beta signup Diablo 4

[Fencers]

I think it's a bit unfair to sit here and spawn various conjectures based on what you have in Act 1.

Like, lets be frikkin' real - neither you nor me have any idea what endgame content there actually will be and what "Season 1" will even mean on that front.

The endgame has nothing to do with the gameplay systems. Running a dungeon with X or Y modifiers doesn't change how you fundamentally play the game. I am talking about gameplay, not game modes or player methodology in playing the game (that's what endgames are, a player-driven methodology).

If Blizzard introduces a go-kart endgame, then you got me, they did indeed introduce gameplay I did not foresee at endgame.

Though I highly doubt the "last dungeon" is a different set of gameplay than what you experience in act 1.

That's really the most concerning thing at the moment that a lot of people don't realize, they look at "Beta" and think "anything could still happen".

Well, this beta released is probably several iterations behind whatever they are working on now. But major gameplay changes are not something you make in 2 months generally. I would not call that "finished" though.

I worked in the game industry on children's education software and as part of regional marketing and sales for SOE and Frogster. I never saw a game change it's fundamental design or gameplay without major delay. Like years. Diablo 4 is very likely to gone gold in a few weeks.

- - - Updated - - -

Well then you are doing it very wrong.

I disagree. If the gameplay is not apparent in the first hour or so of play then you are playing a bad game.

Does the gameplay of World of Warcraft change at level 60 than at 20? Do I no longer complete quests, slot skills on my hotbar, tab to enemies and press the corresponding skill buttons in sequence?

This is genuine. The last time I played WoW was for half an hour when Cataclysm was released. Blizzard wanted to give me a free time card or somesuch. I genuinely do not know if World of Warcraft changed its gameplay ala Runescape or Star Wars Galaxies.

[KrayZ33]

I disagree. If the gameplay is not apparent in the first hour or so of play then you are playing a bad game.

Does the gameplay of World of Warcraft change at level 60 than at 20? Do I no longer complete quests, slot skills on my hotbar, tab to enemies and press the corresponding skill buttons in sequence?

This is genuine. The last time I played WoW was for half an hour when Cataclysm was released. Blizzard wanted to give me a free time card or somesuch. I genuinely do not know if World of Warcraft changed its gameplay ala Runescape or Star Wars Galaxies.

It's irrelevant to the discussing you had, but it depends on what you see as "gameplay".
The things you mentioned are systems the game uses that define how you "play the game" (gameplay) and they are used differently when you compare the leveling experience and the end-game experience.
If you played WoW at any point in time and got to endgame level you would know that raiding doesn't play nor feel like leveling at all.
They feel quite different to even dungeons as well, which you probably don't even see in your first hour of playing WoW.
(the game basically turns from a SP to a MP/Coop game)

Modern wow expansions which introduced the M+ system which is different to the leveling and leveling-dungeon experience as well. All of a sudden you are racing a clock, and the skills you have are used differently or even used for the first time in general. All of a sudden positioning matters alongside a lot of other stuff and you don't click 1-2-3 tab 1-2-3 etc.
Questing becomes irrelevant and most people don't do it. The gameplay"loop" changes, you aren't progressing through questlines anymore. You are advancing on a different scale.

etc. etc.


Diablo 4 could technically have systems in place we don't know about - considering the endgame-alpha...and now this beta. It's going to be "nightmare" dungeons (rifts with ladder), invasion types and worldquests. (not saying any of these are gamechanging or whatever, just pointing them out - I also believe we have basically seen everything D4 has to offer in this beta - which for me is enough aside from how poorly done some dungeons are)

Saying "right clicking enemies and dragging skills into a hotbar is not worth 70$/€" which is what you consider as "fundemental gameplay" it seems, doesn't make sense. That's like saying "building units and gathering ressources with worker units isn't worth 70$/€"

[Fencers]

It's irrelevant to the discussing you had, but it depends on what you see as "gameplay".
The things you mentioned are systems the game uses that define how you "play the game" (gameplay) and they are used differently when you compare the leveling experience and the end-game experience.

Gameplay is how the rules of the game behave for you to interface with the game systems. Not how you play the game. Skills are unlocked in this manner, gear is equipped in this sort of way, there are passives that affect X or Y, and so on.

If you played WoW at any point in time and got to endgame level you would know that raiding doesn't play nor feel like leveling at all.

In the original WoW before their expansion, I did raid. It was the same gameplay. Not sure how/if that changed.

But in the hundreds of other MMOs I have played endgame within- not one has had particularly different gameplay other than the first hour.

Diablo 4 could technically have systems in place we don't know about - not that I believe that.

Sure. But I doubt it would be so in 2 months time.

Saying "right clicking enemies and dragging skills into a hotbar is not worth 70$/€" which is what you consider as "fundemental gameplay" it seems, doesn't make sense. That's like saying "building units and gathering ressources with worker units isn't worth 70$/€"

If not a fan of the genre and basic gameplay of "building units and gathering resources with worker units", I absolutely would advise it is not worth your $70. There are tons of games I would not recommend for the full price to non-fans of the genre or gameplay mechanisms. Even if they have an adjacent interest.

[Makabreska]

I disagree. If the gameplay is not apparent in the first hour or so of play then you are playing a bad game.

Does the gameplay of World of Warcraft change at level 60 than at 20? Do I no longer complete quests, slot skills on my hotbar, tab to enemies and press the corresponding skill buttons in sequence?

This is genuine. The last time I played WoW was for half an hour when Cataclysm was released. Blizzard wanted to give me a free time card or somesuch. I genuinely do not know if World of Warcraft changed its gameplay ala Runescape or Star Wars Galaxies.

Yes, it is a vastly different experience and you kinda do not understand what it means to be low lvl and not have access to end game. At lvl 20 you have a fraction of your abilities, your rotation is slow and bland. At lvl 20 you can only go to low lvl dungeons that everyone breezes through, never stepping a foot in a current content raid. You do not witness Mythic+ or proper PvP. And the list goes on.

What does it matter that at every lvl you complete quests or tab to enemies, when these things are not what define the gameplay? You kinda seem to play dumb here with this focus on such a weird elements like alt tabbing.

[Tojara]

It's irrelevant to the discussing you had, but it depends on what you see as "gameplay".
The things you mentioned are systems the game uses that define how you "play the game" (gameplay) and they are used differently when you compare the leveling experience and the end-game experience.
If you played WoW at any point in time and got to endgame level you would know that raiding doesn't play nor feel like leveling at all.
They feel quite different to even dungeons as well, which you probably don't even see in your first hour of playing WoW.
(the game basically turns from a SP to a MP/Coop game)

Modern wow expansions which introduced the M+ system which is different to the leveling and leveling-dungeon experience as well. All of a sudden you are racing a clock, and the skills you have are used differently or even used for the first time in general. All of a sudden positioning matters alongside a lot of other stuff and you don't click 1-2-3 tab 1-2-3 etc.
Questing becomes irrelevant and most people don't do it. The gameplay"loop" changes, you aren't progressing through questlines anymore. You are advancing on a different scale.

etc. etc.


Diablo 4 could technically have systems in place we don't know about - considering the endgame-alpha...and now this beta. It's going to be "nightmare" dungeons (rifts with ladder), invasion types and worldquests. (not saying any of these are gamechanging or whatever, just pointing them out - I also believe we have basically seen everything D4 has to offer in this beta - which for me is enough aside from how poorly done some dungeons are)

Saying "right clicking enemies and dragging skills into a hotbar is not worth 70$/€" which is what you consider as "fundemental gameplay" it seems, doesn't make sense. That's like saying "building units and gathering ressources with worker units isn't worth 70$/€"

Yeah IDK. It certainly depends on the genre. I play PoE every season but fucking hate leveling in it. I only do it because I love the end game. My impression of the game through the leveling experience is dogshit and even though I hate it I know it progressively gets better. I'd basically barely play any ARPGs if I only gave them 1 hour of time to feel out if the game was engaging enough or not. PoE for me is literally trying to get through the campaign as fast as possible not really having fun, spamming my mobility skill and the one core ability that's okay for leveling. Once I reach maps it's all gravy because I get to do what I want to do.

WoW in it's infancy was fun because I had no metric about how MMOs operate, and leveling was fun in the first few expansions. Once it became formulaic for me, the only fun part of the game was just the raids, dungeons and PvP.

IDK. I feel the exact opposite. I feel like D4 engaged me from a combat loop immediately, but I'm more cautious about what the endgame is. It's exactly the opposite of how I perceive PoE currently. PoE is super boring for the first 6-12 hours, followed by something that I consider really fun. I trudge towards the end of PoE because I know it's good when you finish the campaign, and for now I enjoy D4 not knowing what lies ahead at the end game. For all I know it could suck, and I'd just stop playing until it's cleaned up.

[chiddie]

No, I am basing my opinion on the game systems and gameplay (which I specifically talk about) in directing my thoughts contextually toward those players ambivalent about D4. I specifically said in the quoted portion that the game has a lot of well-done content.

Normally, I do not offer opinions on the relative value of any media. That is for the consumer to decide for themselves at the end of the day. However, D4 is a high-profile title with a lot of interest as to it being "worth it" at the moment. It is $70 at the base end. You may disagree, which I do not mind, but I think it is sensible to say only fans of the genre or franchise should be putting down that money at the moment.

"Well-made game but wait for a sale unless you are really into this..." is not a damning condemnation of Diablo 4.

Let’s put it into another perspective. Given all ARPGS have a similar leveling structure for the first levels (I played even PoE a bit and I don’t remember the first 20-25 levels being THAT different honestly), what would you have expected to see in this beta to make it worth spending 70 bucks?

[KrayZ33]

If not a fan of the genre and basic gameplay of "building units and gathering resources with worker units", I absolutely would advise it is not worth your $70. There are tons of games I would not recommend for the full price to non-fans of the genre or gameplay mechanisms. Even if they have an adjacent interest.

That's so freaking irrelevant though.
It's so meaningless to say that. That's what I'm saying and honestly, the things you have just written are quite obviously not what you suggested earlier.

Is there any "strategy-game where you build bases like in starcraft", out there that costs even 30-50€, that is "worth the money" even if you don't like "strategy games where you build bases like in starcraft?"
Obviously not.

Is it worth spending 70$ for a ARPG that is coincidentally named Diablo4 - if you enjoy(ed) playing games like Lost Ark, Grim Dawn, PoE, Diablo 1-3, Van Helsing, Pagan, Wolcen etc. etc.
That's the only point of view someone should have when suggesting buying this title or not.

What we have seen in the first 25 levels is so generic, that it's hard to say yes or no *especially* if you only focus on the "gameplay"... because it's how all the games in the genre play.

[xskarma]

Absolutely the WORST boss as a Barb.

I can just imagine. Were you paralyzed for the majority of the fight, or just sitting in a puke puddle soaking constant damage?

I'm a glutton for punishment so I made ANOTHER Barb after I leveled and geared the first one. That's some 45 levels of pure barbarism.

On 1 I was Flay/Whirlwind, with some shouts and Deathblow and no movement skills beyond runspeed and dodge button. My attacks caused DoT and bleeds though, not many but some, and I was pretty tanky. Was just an average fight, took a while, needed to keep adds under control and just keep pounding away at boss inbetween. I didn;t even know this boss was supposed to be annoying or anything at this point, cause I had been a plodding Barb the whole time, so this changed very little for me.

On Barb 2 I specifically sought out this dungeon and this boss. On this one I was Lunging Strike and Rend, with a shout, Leap and Deathblow (deathblow rocks, seriously). So this one had alllllllllll the movement. Now, hard to tell if it was easier or not, since this Barb had the benefit of all the account stuff I unlocked with barb no. 1 plus OP gear from Barb no. 1, but I can tell you that sticking to the Spider boss was ZERO issue with that build. Lunging Strike is amazing for movement and it felt really satisfying to zoom around the world and in dungeons using it.

So honestly, not sure why the Spider boss is made out to be such a villain. I certainly didn't have much trouble with it, despite it's slows and stuff, cause on 1 I had the movement to still stick with him most of the time, and on the other I was a brick shit house that spins and my occasional driveby pummeling of the boss was enough to kill it in a reasonable time compared to my other boss kills.

The more interesting question is what the best way to defeat the boss and just difficult end game content in general will be once the game is live. Whirlwind seemed more powerful, but I also had more build specific gear for him as I went along. The Lunge Barb was more FUN though. I'm thinking some kind of Leap/Quake/Lunge/Rend Barb might work well for speedrunning, but I only got to just about level 20 on that Barb and didn;t have the time to try it at "endgame" in Act 1 where things were more on equal footing with Barb 1.

[Aucald]

So honestly, not sure why the Spider boss is made out to be such a villain. I certainly didn't have much trouble with it, despite it's slows and stuff, cause on 1 I had the movement to still stick with him most of the time, and on the other I was a brick shit house that spins and my occasional driveby pummeling of the boss was enough to kill it in a reasonable time compared to my other boss kills.

I didn't get the chance to refight this spider boss with my Sorcerer Ultimate unlocked, and I was curious as to how that might change the flow of the fight. Also didn't get a chance to play anything but the Sorcerer this time around, but next open weekend I'm considering rolling up a Barbarian to see how it goes.

[NoiseTank13]

I feel like I'm experiencing major deja vu as everyone with positive feelings towards this game based on the beta sounds exactly like the same people saying positive things about Diablo 3.

I'm actually getting dizzy.

[The Oblivion]

I feel like I'm experiencing major deja vu as everyone with positive feelings towards this game based on the beta sounds exactly like the same people saying positive things about Diablo 3.

I'm actually getting dizzy.

diablo 3 was an amazing game, broke sales records, and held hundreds of thousands of players a year later. seems like a real good thing

[Fencers]

Let’s put it into another perspective. Given all ARPGS have a similar leveling structure for the first levels (I played even PoE a bit and I don’t remember the first 20-25 levels being THAT different honestly), what would you have expected to see in this beta to make it worth spending 70 bucks?

As a fan of this genre and franchise; I got all I wanted. I spent over $400 on the game and enjoyed it a lot.

If I were a non-fan, I would say either a more novel interpretation of gameplay systems (such as gearing) or to the gameplay itself. Something such as having more control over attacks or command inputs.

When I play games in other genres and franchises I have no particular investment of, I ask the same; what is this doing differently? What does it do well? What is being expressed here in gameplay? Are the metaphors executed well? And so on.

That ought to be the logic for the assessment of all video games.

[Gaidax]

I feel like I'm experiencing major deja vu as everyone with positive feelings towards this game based on the beta sounds exactly like the same people saying positive things about Diablo 3.

I'm actually getting dizzy.

Because Diablo 4, to put it in simple terms, is a good game.

Yes, there are bad parts in it (dungeons, barbarians, story-ish), but as a whole - it's what I like.

Now we don't know what the actual end game will be, what seasons are, and there it can either become great or go down the drain. But based on what I personally tried, I like it.

Though maybe it's because I rolled Sorc and got to blow the fuck up whole screens of enemies in 2 button presses.

[Fencers]

Yes, it is a vastly different experience and you kinda do not understand what it means to be low lvl and not have access to end game. At lvl 20 you have a fraction of your abilities, your rotation is slow and bland. At lvl 20 you can only go to low lvl dungeons that everyone breezes through, never stepping a foot in a current content raid. You do not witness Mythic+ or proper PvP. And the list goes on.

What does it matter that at every lvl you complete quests or tab to enemies, when these things are not what define the gameplay? You kinda seem to play dumb here with this focus on such a weird elements like alt tabbing.

"Bland" is meaningless. There is no way to quantifiy that in a way useful.

Gameplay is simply and only the rules of interfacing with the game systems. Rather that is fast or slow, more or less complex doesn't change the gameplay expression.

It might change how you feel about the gameplay. I.e. level 20 is bland.

But the gameplay doesn't change because I have more skills if I use those skills in the same expression within World of Warcraft. Not anymore than gameplay is different at Hyper mode in Project Lazurus or running the Atlas in Path of Exile because I am doing those things faster or with more skills on the bar.

Admittedly, you probably know World of Warcraft better than I do. So I am willing to concede to you that perhaps WoW at max level has different gameplay. I don't know because I don't play that game.

- - - Updated - - -

That's so freaking irrelevant though.

I disagree. I often asked this of games that seem new or interesting in genres I don't regularly play.

Such as the recent Sons of the Forest. I asked in Reddit as a non-fan of survival games is SoF worth it because X/Y elements appeal to me. And I got good takes on SoF as a result.

Is there any "strategy-game where you build bases like in starcraft", out there that costs even 30-50€, that is "worth the money" even if you don't like "strategy games where you build bases like in starcraft?"

I honestly thought you were talking about the recent Dune game, my dude. Gotta miss me with these Blizzard games. Diablo is the only one I play. I don't play any other Blizzard games.

Yes, there those games out there.

Is it worth spending 70$ for a ARPG that is coincidentally named Diablo4 - if you enjoy(ed) playing games like Lost Ark, Grim Dawn, PoE, Diablo 1-3, Van Helsing, Pagan, Wolcen etc. etc.
That's the only point of view someone should have when suggesting buying this title or not.

I disagree. I talked to such people in gaming discord all weekend that dropped in the channel curious to what we were playing.

What we have seen in the first 25 levels is so generic, that it's hard to say yes or no *especially* if you only focus on the "gameplay"... because it's how all the games in the genre play.

I am consistently critical of those other games too. And games in genres that also follow too closely to established mechanics and tropes such as Souls-likes and JRPGs.

[xskarma]

About the "is it worth it?" discussion: That's basically a personal decision for everyone. You can see it in this very thread that there's a ton of people all with varying experiences of the game and their own idea of its worth. It's impossible to say what someone else will like or not like or to find "worth" or not.

For some, "worth" means they can play through the story and get to max level, and spend like 50 hours on the game and not touch it again till an eventual expansion, to them they got their worth from the game. For some they could potentially sink thousands of hours into the game and still feel the game was overpriced and not "worth" it.

It's a personal decision based on money, time and experience and no one can make it for others. To me it's worth it. To others it may not. Discussing it like there's an all encompassing ultimate answer to that question out there is pointless.

[Coldkil]

It felt like that to me, at first, until my Sorcerer got their Ultimate, and the method of play sort of changed. Before I had my Ultimate I found I needed to basically kite around a small area and keep ahead of the boss while controlling any add spawns, making fights a time slog at best. When I got the Ultimate I could sort of enter a limited god mode for a bit and basically rip down a boss to less than half their life, then I needed to kite for a bit until it came back up. Sometimes I could whittle down the bosses' remaining health in kite mode, but if it took more than a minute, I could retrigger my Ultimate and proceed to slaughter them.

Needless to say, bosses went from taking 4-5 minutes to kill, to about a minute and change.

I didn't bother reaching 25 cause i didn't have much time to play and the Druid wasn't there tbh. Reached 23 woth my rogue, couldn't do the world boss either because of spawn times that were exactly at dinner time and nreakfast time XD

I want to play more next weekend though. I'm the kind of player that never gets into a game the first time but has to try again when things are more familiar.

EDIT: so many people calling D4 an MMO. And justifying the fact you can play solo because it's and MMOARPG. It has MMO elements but it's not one and doesn't play like one. And tbh it's those MMO elements that i don't know if they're going to fit in a seasonal setup.

[chiddie]

About the "is it worth it?" discussion: That's basically a personal decision for everyone. You can see it in this very thread that there's a ton of people all with varying experiences of the game and their own idea of its worth. It's impossible to say what someone else will like or not like or to find "worth" or not.

For some, "worth" means they can play through the story and get to max level, and spend like 50 hours on the game and not touch it again till an eventual expansion, to them they got their worth from the game. For some they could potentially sink thousands of hours into the game and still feel the game was overpriced and not "worth" it.

It's a personal decision based on money, time and experience and no one can make it for others. To me it's worth it. To others it may not. Discussing it like there's an all encompassing ultimate answer to that question out there is pointless.

I was curious because honestly my starting point with whatever game is “am I interested to the genre?”

I mean, I’m not interested in moba, the game could be AAAAA+ in the moba compartment but I won’t buy it nor I would play it even if it was f2p.

Now, with this mindset, if you are here you are interested in ARPGS. If you are interested and you tried this beta, there’s no way you can tell how the game will be in its totality because ARPGS have a story mode and an (hopefully) infinite endgame. You can’t judge the gameplay in 20-25 levels of any ARPG. You can judge the graphics and the sound and in part how the combat feels, but not much more than that.

[Kilpi]

You do realize that battle.net was released together with Diablo 1 and Diablo 1 was the first game to use it? And that was 1996. Yes D1 and D2 were still mostly offline experiences, but D3 already was full online one and that was a decade ago.

Offline games are a dying breed, so buckle up and enjoy the ride and hell, asking Diablo, of all things, to be offline is like a big "bruh" moment given the whole franchise is actually a progenitor of modern online games.

You do realize what I meant about games being always online for no reason? Like, Diablo 3 after RoS had NO reason to remain always online yet it still did and the game (or at least players) suffered from it.

- - - Updated - - -

The always online is done as an extra layer to prevent piracy.

That's a shitty excuse to make the game worse. Even worse than DRM that does more harm than good.

[Ophenia]

Hey guys, what about the performances ? Is it playable with an old computer (like a 1070 graphic card and around same generation's processor) or am I in for a very bad laggy time ?

[xskarma]

Hey guys, what about the performances ? Is it playable with an old computer (like a 1070 graphic card and around same generation's processor) or am I in for a very bad laggy time ?

My BIL plays on a slightly newer GPU, but comparable in power to a 1060 and a CPU/MOBO/RAM from around that time (he still has DDR3 memory). It runs fine on his set up, but his CPU does get quite warm (70 on idle in game, up to 85+ when under load).

Things will obviously still be hard to compare, but other than the occasional rubberbanding that basically everyone had when entering/exiting town, my BIL had no other issues.

EDIT: should add: Try it in the Open Beta next weekend! Best and only way to find out.