I look forward to Diablo 4, but I'm afraid I won't enjoy it

[Nzx]

D2 wins in everything else - ambient, music, storytelling, freedom of exploration,

Imagine playing an ARPG for any of this. I don't understand that at all - storytelling in a game about repeatedly mowing down thousands of pointless enemies for loot in order to kill those same enemies faster, why on earth would you care about the "freedom of exploration"?

[matrix123mko]

Well, I like games with long singleplayer story.

[korijenkins]

As someone who cares about the story, I'm concerned about a game that is non-linear.

Very easy to half-ass the narrative and make the leveling experience a miserable drag, not to mention that it can be very repetitive if they put no effort into it.

[mvaliz]

We just don't know right now what the end game systems will look like.

Neither does blizzard.

Too early to get worried about this. But, if there's any solace, just focus on enjoying the journey. It's okay if your end-game goals are different than someone else's.

No, it's not too early to be worried about this. Angrily worried? Of course not - but vocally voicing it calmly? Absolutely the perfect time!

You want devs to potentially hear your potential concerns BEFORE they make mistakes, not after.

- - - Updated - - -

Imagine playing an ARPG for any of this. I don't understand that at all - storytelling in a game about repeatedly mowing down thousands of pointless enemies for loot in order to kill those same enemies faster, why on earth would you care about the "freedom of exploration"?

That's where I'm standing on that odd word choice. =/

This would be the FIRST time I'd ever hear somebody say the words "Exploration" and "Diablo" in the same sentence. It's not designed for that... it's designed to be a repetitive dungeon crawler.

When I hear "Freedom to Explore" I think Elder Scrolls... not Diablo. Freedom to Explore means finding unique things in a vast area. Diablo has never done that... in fact, it's the opposite. It's a set series of dungeon blocks that are randomly placed together with equally random-sets of creatures in it. Diablo 2 even mroeso simply because it was all fixed-level crap via doing an outdated "Try it on Hard Mode!" model of game design.

[Nurvus]

Imagine playing an ARPG for any of this. I don't understand that at all - storytelling in a game about repeatedly mowing down thousands of pointless enemies for loot in order to kill those same enemies faster, why on earth would you care about the "freedom of exploration"?

Quite frankly I'm not sure what you are on about.

I didn't say one game is fundamentally better.
I said I like D3 graphics, combat and endgame better, pointed out D2 strengths (don't forget one came after the other) and then proceeded to somewhat detail what I consider the biggest strengths in each of them, and pointed out some flaws.

I didn't say how much better (or worse) either game is at any given aspect, either.

What makes you pick an ARPG over another?
Does the visual style play a part?
Are you immune to cringy storytelling?
Did you like D3 forcing you to play on rails for most of the leveling (before the Adventure Mode was introduced)?

Do I also have to remind you that D3 is worse than D2 in multiple aspects despite having been released so many years later with plenty of games launched in between.

Here's something "silly" I'm concerned about for D4 - Inventory Size.

D2 gave you a small inventory, specially so when considering that you had different item sizes.
This forced you to make choices about what to take with you or leave behind.

D3 has a bigger inventory and less size variation. This is convenient but has adverse effects in how you play.

[scelero]

take everything with a grain of salt. i cant tell you how long ive been waiting for ff7 remake to come out, but i also know there's a possibility nostalgia will wear off and I won't finish the remake. But I'm ok with it.

I've probably spent more money on half eaten sandwiches from mcdonalds, and I'm pretty sure I can come back to my copy of ff7 remake anytime, whereas I wont come back years later to eat the uneaten portions of a late night fast food run.

[mvaliz]

Like kids today have the attention span to spend a lot of their excessive time committed to one game. They're into mobile games because you can blow through them in short bursts of time before moving on to the next thing, otherwise, MMO's wouldn't be in decline in popularity and ActiBlizzard wouldn't be shifting priorities to development of mobile games like Immortal.

This reads literally like the gaming equivalent of "Get off My Lawn, you damn kids!!" >_<

Skyrim and other Open World games would like to have a word with you. Shit, God of War won game of the year last year... and that's a heluva lot more than 40 hours of game there.

And Blizz isn't going towards their priorities because "kids" don't like that - they're doing it because that brings in stupid-levels of money from all ages in China. You'd think Diablo Immortal's Bombtastic Blizzcon Derpsplosion Reaction would've proven that point to you...

[Kyphael]

Yeah you cracked the case all right >.>

Thank you! I fancy myself a regular Sherlock Holmes.



- - - Updated - - -

This reads literally like the gaming equivalent of "Get off My Lawn, you damn kids!!" >_<

Skyrim and other Open World games would like to have a word with you. Shit, God of War won game of the year last year... and that's a heluva lot more than 40 hours of game there.

And Blizz isn't going towards their priorities because "kids" don't like that - they're doing it because that brings in stupid-levels of money from all ages in China. You'd think Diablo Immortal's Bombtastic Blizzcon Derpsplosion Reaction would've proven that point to you...

Um... while I've heard of this God of War and Kratos, I've never played it, and never knew it took 40 hours to play! But if it does take 40 hours to play, I always assumed anyone younger than 21 was not playing it, but playing Candy Crush, and Angry Birds... what else do kids play nowadays... the My Little Pony game?

And it is well documented that anyone under the age of 21 has no consideration for lawn maintenance.

- - - Updated - - -

There are most certainly kids that don't have the attention span of a squirrel. I have multiple nieces and nephews that spend a shit ton of time playing WoW, strategy games, etc currently. Never said every kid, nor was I implying D4 was going to grab the youth market.. So your response was kind of pointless (since it's obvious I'm referencing robbing any kid of the CHANCE at having the same experiences as OP did growing up which is selfish as fuck).

D3 already plays like a shallow mobile game for people with short attention spans when you get inundated with all the shit you want quickly so OP can remain playing D3.. or as you put it.. He can try Diablo: Immortal

So you're saying my comments about Generation Z are grossly misinformed and ignorantly stereotypical? Despite mobile games being all the craze and MMO's declining in popularity, only surviving due to holdovers with Stockholm syndrome that still play it semi-loyally? Are the world first guilds comprised of a bunch of sub-19 year-old kids?

- - - Updated - - -

Well you should be able to tell whether you'll enjoy the gameplay from when more and more content is shown of it, so... No need to fret I'd say, at least not at this point.



That sounds like generalization. Does that mean my niece is correct in saying that "all old people are boring and don't understand tech"...? No, it doesn't.

I'd be very VERY surprised if the majority of mobile gamers, weren't adults. Same as it always was in WoW, for example. Now Fortnite, on the other hand...

Well I can tell you right now, from my experiences in banking, a majority of old people not only don't understand tech, they don't want to!

"Sir, I know you call us like 6 times a day to get your balance, and sometimes you get no answer because we're busy with more important matters, so can I assist you in downloading our mobile app so you can check your balance any time, at your convenience?"

"No, no! I don't want the hassle, I just want to call the bank to get my balance."

While not EVERY old person is like that, it's easily like 8 out of 10. Likewise, I'd wager that while there are plenty of children out there who play God of War, and World of Warcraft, Wildcraft, and Tekken 7, they're probably in the minority and most kids like to play Angry Birds, Overcooked! 2, and Splatoon, or whatever video games with short attention spans are out there in the market. I wouldn't know, I don't play anything other than WoW, Fighterz and Xenoverse 2, these are wide generalizations based on my imagination.

[Queen of Hamsters]

*snip cuz I'm on a phooooone*.

Old people to my niece, is anyone above the age of 25.

And some of the most tech-savvy people I know, are above 60. My own father, for one.

[Kyphael]

Old people to my niece, is anyone above the age of 25.

And some of the most tech-savvy people I know, are above 60. My own father, for one.

I'm not on a phone! >:O

And I never said all old people are tech-challenged. lol Your father is the exception, not the standard. If you lined up 10 senior citizens of varying backgrounds and education levels and asked them all if they know how to use a mobile phone, odds are a majority won't know how, but there will always be a couple that do know.

[jstnw89]

So you're saying my comments about Generation Z are grossly misinformed and ignorantly stereotypical? Despite mobile games being all the craze and MMO's declining in popularity, only surviving due to holdovers with Stockholm syndrome that still play it semi-loyally? Are the world first guilds comprised of a bunch of sub-19 year-old kids?

What the hell are you even arguing? Never said any of that.

[Zelk]

I really like the playstyle of Diablo 3 where you can get the max level in a couple of days and then just enjoy grinding end game and getting cool upgrades.
I'm not that kid anymore who played games for 18 hours and slept for 6. I realized this while playing Wolcen. I don't want to waste my time.

did you mean reach max level in a couple of hours? Because levels in D3 are entirely pointless passed about 2 hours into a season.

[Aphrel]

im afraid they will do some normal/nightmare/hell system again.. Its sucks to down the endboss within 10 hours imo.

The endboss should be the endboss of the endgame. Not something you blitz past durng lowlvl.

Im hoping Lillith is the shaper of d4, not the kitava.

[Beefhammer]

did you mean reach max level in a couple of hours? Because levels in D3 are entirely pointless passed about 2 hours into a season.

Couple of hours if you are a skilled veteran concerned with reaching 70 as fast as possible. It takes me about 2-3 nights of a couple hours to hit 70. But then I usually start on T1 for the loot/gold bonuses. Which after a certain point it becomes slower, but I'm a masochist when it comes to Diablo leveling.

So for casual play it ca easily take a few days.

- - - Updated - - -

Quite frankly I'm not sure what you are on about.

I didn't say one game is fundamentally better.
I said I like D3 graphics, combat and endgame better, pointed out D2 strengths (don't forget one came after the other) and then proceeded to somewhat detail what I consider the biggest strengths in each of them, and pointed out some flaws.

I didn't say how much better (or worse) either game is at any given aspect, either.

What makes you pick an ARPG over another?
Does the visual style play a part?
Are you immune to cringy storytelling?
Did you like D3 forcing you to play on rails for most of the leveling (before the Adventure Mode was introduced)?

Do I also have to remind you that D3 is worse than D2 in multiple aspects despite having been released so many years later with plenty of games launched in between.

Here's something "silly" I'm concerned about for D4 - Inventory Size.

D2 gave you a small inventory, specially so when considering that you had different item sizes.
This forced you to make choices about what to take with you or leave behind.

D3 has a bigger inventory and less size variation. This is convenient but has adverse effects in how you play.

Please. Unless you forced yourself not to, most players portaled back sold, portaled, picked up, portaled again and repeated until done. This is the biggest misconception that D2 forced you to make tough decisions regarding what gear to pick up. The game flooded you with TPs tonthe point the small inventory and the I inventory tetris was pointless.

[Redroniksre]

I am decently excited, the gameplay of Diablo 3 alone will make it fun for me. That said, i am hoping they don't lean too hard on Diablo 2, because it had it problems. And i am hoping they don't make build diversity worse by caving to those people who have a hard on for "Adds 2% cold damage" skills.

[Kumorii]

Quite frankly I'm not sure what you are on about.

I didn't say one game is fundamentally better.
I said I like D3 graphics, combat and endgame better, pointed out D2 strengths (don't forget one came after the other) and then proceeded to somewhat detail what I consider the biggest strengths in each of them, and pointed out some flaws.

I didn't say how much better (or worse) either game is at any given aspect, either.

What makes you pick an ARPG over another?
Does the visual style play a part?
Are you immune to cringy storytelling?
Did you like D3 forcing you to play on rails for most of the leveling (before the Adventure Mode was introduced)?

Do I also have to remind you that D3 is worse than D2 in multiple aspects despite having been released so many years later with plenty of games launched in between.

Here's something "silly" I'm concerned about for D4 - Inventory Size.

D2 gave you a small inventory, specially so when considering that you had different item sizes.
This forced you to make choices about what to take with you or leave behind.

D3 has a bigger inventory and less size variation. This is convenient but has adverse effects in how you play.

The first thing most people get is the tome of town portal. After that inventory space is simply charm/pot space.... by all things of D2 you say inventory space was a crucial factor? What are these adverse effects you talk about?

[Nurvus]

Please. Unless you forced yourself not to, most players portaled back sold, portaled, picked up, portaled again and repeated until done. This is the biggest misconception that D2 forced you to make tough decisions regarding what gear to pick up. The game flooded you with TPs tonthe point the small inventory and the I inventory tetris was pointless.

I agree it ultimately was not big of a deal, but the idea was there, and could have been fleshed out.

The developers of D3 had the choice of either a) focus more on meaningful decisions or b) embracing the portal spam and lack of decision making.

Since they clearly went with b), I ask why didn't they make inventory much bigger?
If in D2 it was more or less meaningless as long as you had TPs and patience to go back and forth, how much more meaningless did it become in D3?

- - - Updated - - -

The first thing most people get is the tome of town portal. After that inventory space is simply charm/pot space.... by all things of D2 you say inventory space was a crucial factor? What are these adverse effects you talk about?

Indeed, but the concept was there to be improved.
Again, D2 isn't some kind of gospel, but it had some cool ideas worth improving, many of which were dropped for pure convenience.

[GreenJesus]

There are most certainly kids that don't have the attention span of a squirrel. I have multiple nieces and nephews that spend a shit ton of time playing WoW, strategy games, etc currently. Never said every kid, nor was I implying D4 was going to grab the youth market.. So your response was kind of pointless (since it's obvious I'm referencing robbing any kid of the CHANCE at having the same experiences as OP did growing up which is selfish as fuck).

D3 already plays like a shallow mobile game for people with short attention spans when you get inundated with all the shit you want quickly so OP can remain playing D3.. or as you put it.. He can try Diablo: Immortal

Yep. I'm scared D4 will just be some shallow asian mobile MMO from what I saw with the world boss mechanics and "Attack" / "Defense" stats. The fact they are integrating more MMO mechanics into a dark and gritty ARPG scares me a bit. It should be solo based with co-op/team opportunities. The whole MMO vibe means that the content will probably be spread out over time and there will be a sub fee or something and you will be capped on what content you can do per day/week.

[Stardrift]

Darker graphics is as far as Blizzard is willing to go.

D4 no doubt will be caked in bugs and problems that won't get resolved, if WoW and WCIII is any indicator.

- - - Updated - - -

Imagine playing an ARPG for any of this. I don't understand that at all - storytelling in a game about repeatedly mowing down thousands of pointless enemies for loot in order to kill those same enemies faster, why on earth would you care about the "freedom of exploration"?

I couldn't imagine playing games just to click shiny buttons and collect shiny loot with nothing else to look forward to.

You may as well just be playing whack-a-mole if you don't want anything more than to just whack shit for mindless dopamine.

[Hellobolis]

i'm taking a bad until proven otherwise approach to d4 (and elder scrolls 6).