Diablo Immortal major annoyance that will transfer to Diablo 4

[Molvonos]

Some sure, but tell me, honestly, which do you think would have more players:

1. Diablo 4, only multiplayer
2. Diablo 4, multiplayer mode (but there is also a single player mode)

Even if less people are interested in D4 if there is no single player, option one will still have more players, cause many people would rather play multiplayer only Diablo 4 than no Diablo 4.

Doesn't really matter.

Why?

Because the main end-game content will have a cap on how many people can be involved, which will be four (4) people. We're talking Neph Rifts, Greater Rifts, and Bosses, where most of the grinding is done, making the idea of 'more' entirely moot. More people will make doing bounties and all that annoying and even out in the Open World, your group is limited to 4, so again, why does 'amount' matter?

It doesnt. Because people who want to play Diablo 4, a vast majority of them, are coming from previous Diablo games where 'open world' wasn't a thing and will do nothing except making the completion of aforementioned bounties annoying as hell. And one thing that annoyed me more than anything in Diablo Immortal was seeing an Orange Elite and seeing it grayed out just because someone else had tagged in seconds before I could.

Your argument is a fallacy as a result of this. Diablo 4 is not a MMO, it's end game content is not meant for groups greater than 4 (looking at WoW raiding as the comparison to this).

Unless they create 'Guild v. Guild' content like Immortals has (which, frankly, not everyone wants to participate in either), having an 'MMO' experience in an ARPG is gonna end up bad, resulting in Blizz doing something similar to what Mad Head Games did with Pagan Online and turning off the MMO experience for something far more palatable to most Diablo players.

[Battlebeard]

Honestly, how an ARPG fan can dislike grinding but like the genre is similarly perplexing to me. Because grinding is literally the whole point of the genre.

Well, more and more I realize I am not an ARPG fan I guess. I never liked Diablo 2, and the parts I liked most of Diablo 3 were certainly not grinding. I really dislike Path of Exile, but I love Lost Ark and Diablo Immortal.

Point is, I love the story/lore of Diablo, and the dark gothic medieval style. Basically Lost Ark with a Diablo theme would be the perfect game.

Which is why I hope Diablo 4 drops the ARGP aspect and becomes a full MMORPG instead.

[Kumorii]

Some sure, but tell me, honestly, which do you think would have more players:

1. Diablo 4, only multiplayer
2. Diablo 4, multiplayer mode (but there is also a single player mode)

Even if less people are interested in D4 if there is no single player, option one will still have more players, cause many people would rather play multiplayer only Diablo 4 than no Diablo 4.

Definitely 2.

Since people who play multiplayer will obviously play in both choices, meanwhile people who will avoid any multiplayer game won't play the 1 choice.

I have never met one person who prefers multiplayer that said "I won't play this because people can choose to not play multiplayer".

it's easy math.
First choice alienates some players, meanwhile choice 2 includes multiple groups.

[Battlebeard]

Doesn't really matter.

Why?

Because the main end-game content will have a cap on how many people can be involved, which will be four (4) people. We're talking Neph Rifts, Greater Rifts, and Bosses, where most of the grinding is done, making the idea of 'more' entirely moot. More people will make doing bounties and all that annoying and even out in the Open World, your group is limited to 4, so again, why does 'amount' matter?

It doesnt. Because people who want to play Diablo 4, a vast majority of them, are coming from previous Diablo games where 'open world' wasn't a thing and will do nothing except making the completion of aforementioned bounties annoying as hell. And one thing that annoyed me more than anything in Diablo Immortal was seeing an Orange Elite and seeing it grayed out just because someone else had tagged in seconds before I could.

Your argument is a fallacy as a result of this. Diablo 4 is not a MMO, it's end game content is not meant for groups greater than 4 (looking at WoW raiding as the comparison to this).

Unless they create 'Guild v. Guild' content like Immortals has (which, frankly, not everyone wants to participate in either), having an 'MMO' experience in an ARPG is gonna end up bad, resulting in Blizz doing something similar to what Mad Head Games did with Pagan Online and turning off the MMO experience for something far more palatable to most Diablo players.

We don't know yet what it's gonna be. I hope they take inspiration from Lost Ark and mage grand raids in D4 with maybe even up to 20 people or so. I think the ARPG genre is far outdated, and I hope D4 becomes an improved Immortal with even more MMO style of gameplay.

Anything is possible at this point, which is why I am VERY happy to see Immortal making a lot of money, hopefully that could be the push they need to make D4 into an mmorpg.

- - - Updated - - -

Definitely 2.

Since people who play multiplayer will obviously play in both choices, meanwhile people who will avoid any multiplayer game won't play the 1 choice.

I have never met one person who prefers multiplayer that said "I won't play this because people can choose to not play multiplayer".

I will 100% not play unless there is multiplayer. I personally think single player games are pointless, and I think offline games are pointless. You can have the best story ever, if you cannot play with and against other people, video games is just a waste of time.

[Edge-]

Well, more and more I realize I am not an ARPG fan I guess. I never liked Diablo 2, and the parts I liked most of Diablo 3 were certainly not grinding. I really dislike Path of Exile, but I love Lost Ark and Diablo Immortal.

Point is, I love the story/lore of Diablo, and the dark gothic medieval style. Basically Lost Ark with a Diablo theme would be the perfect game.

Which is why I hope Diablo 4 drops the ARGP aspect and becomes a full MMORPG instead.

That's cool, seems like you prefer the more "adventure" part of ARPG's vs. the grinding. Plenty of games cater to that vs. the longterm grind like Titan's Quest or Dungeon Siege, but most of the core ARPG's like Torchlight, PoE, Grim Dawn etc. are all built around the OG Diablo loop of endgame being focused on grinding/loot farming.

Lost Ark with a Diablo theme would just be an MMO with an ARPG combat system, which I enjoy (I need to play more Lost Ark) but doesn't quite scratch my ARPG grinder itch. So makes sense it's more up your alley given your tastes.

D4 is definitely not dropping the ARPG aspect and becoming and MMO, nor should it ever - at least not in mainline games. They can absolutely make it an MMOARPG a la PoE, but the ARPG grinding identity is fairly central to what made Diablo, Diablo.

I want D4 to be a fantastic ARPG and it does look good and sound like they're integrating more MMO-esque elements which are interesting. Would be great to see a proper MMO using the IP as well, but if it did pursue a MMO direction they'd still need to have farming/grinding and endgame like even Lost Ark has.

[Kumorii]

I will 100% not play unless there is multiplayer. I personally think single player games are pointless, and I think offline games are pointless. You can have the best story ever, if you cannot play with and against other people, video games is just a waste of time.

So you can still play diablo 4 in choice 2. You even wrote so yourself "multiplayer mode (but there is also a single player mode)".
Seems like you misunderstood this line:
I have never met one person who prefers multiplayer that said "I won't play this because people can choose to not play multiplayer".

I didn't say I haven't met one who wouldn't play a game if multiplayer didn't exist. That would be ridiculous. I know of people and you even told me that you don't play games unless there is multiplayer. I'm saying that I haven't heard anyone not playing a game because a CHOICE of single player exist.

I can't recall anyone saying multiplayer shouldn't exist. It has existed since Diablo 1 and should still be there.
People just want to choice to be able to play solo if they want to.

Choice 2 is for you and others.

it's easy math.
First choice alienates some players, meanwhile choice 2 includes multiple groups. Including you.

[Battlebeard]

That's cool, seems like you prefer the more "adventure" part of ARPG's vs. the grinding. Plenty of games cater to that vs. the longterm grind like Titan's Quest or Dungeon Siege, but most of the core ARPG's like Torchlight, PoE, Grim Dawn etc. are all built around the OG Diablo loop of endgame being focused on grinding/loot farming.

Lost Ark with a Diablo theme would just be an MMO with an ARPG combat system, which I enjoy (I need to play more Lost Ark) but doesn't quite scratch my ARPG grinder itch. So makes sense it's more up your alley given your tastes.

D4 is definitely not dropping the ARPG aspect and becoming and MMO, nor should it ever - at least not in mainline games. They can absolutely make it an MMOARPG a la PoE, but the ARPG grinding identity is fairly central to what made Diablo, Diablo.

I want D4 to be a fantastic ARPG and it does look good and sound like they're integrating more MMO-esque elements which are interesting. Would be great to see a proper MMO using the IP as well, but if it did pursue a MMO direction they'd still need to have farming/grinding and endgame like even Lost Ark has.

I just hope they don't take too much inspiration from D2 or PoE, they are such old-style games with so called "immersion" and lacks conviniences that D3 have. I do not wanna go back to potions being consumeables, items taking 1/5 of the inventory, or carrying runes. If we gonna have an ARPG, I hope it's highly multiplayer friendly and far more modern, an improved D3.

[Edge-]

I just hope they don't take too much inspiration from D2

So you don't want a Diablo game, again. You just want a narrative action RPG with the Diablo skin >.>

I do not wanna go back to potions being consumeables

It doesn't have to, there are a multitude of other examples of systems to handle this like exist in D3/D:I (cooldowns) or PoE (refilling flasks by killing things, and largely relegating flasks to more utility options vs. necessary to keep yourself alive).

items taking 1/5 of the inventory, or carrying runes.

Again, neither of these have anything to do with what makes Diablo, Diablo. Runes were abandoned for D3, and there are plenty of examples of alternate inventory systems. Inventory management though, will likely remain as that's part of the core ARPG loop of farming loot and needing to make return trips to down to stash/sell it etc.

If we gonna have an ARPG, I hope it's highly multiplayer friendly and far more modern, an improved D3.

It's already confirmed to have multiplayer, with much better multiplayer integration than D3 and a more MMO-esque shared world.

[Battlebeard]

So you don't want a Diablo game, again. You just want a narrative action RPG with the Diablo skin >.>



It doesn't have to, there are a multitude of other examples of systems to handle this like exist in D3/D:I (cooldowns) or PoE (refilling flasks by killing things, and largely relegating flasks to more utility options vs. necessary to keep yourself alive).



Again, neither of these have anything to do with what makes Diablo, Diablo. Runes were abandoned for D3, and there are plenty of examples of alternate inventory systems. Inventory management though, will likely remain as that's part of the core ARPG loop of farming loot and needing to make return trips to down to stash/sell it etc.



It's already confirmed to have multiplayer, with much better multiplayer integration than D3 and a more MMO-esque shared world.

I just don't buy "part of the core" arguments, sorry. I believe that we should always, always strive to improve, in all aspects of life, and that traditions isn't as good as quality. I honestly can't think of a single reason to even have an inventory size. WHY not have unlimited inventory space more or less, why not save the time of TPing to salvage and going back.

There is NOTHING fun with that, it makes no sense to punish the player with these kind of inconviniences in a game like this, absolutely nothing. Take D3, you can loot either 30 big items (like chests or boots) or 60 small items (like belts, necks), so it's not like you really have to strategically chose what to loot like in for instance Resident Evil games. So why not let us loot lets say 500 items? The limitation has no strategic value, it serves no purpose, so WHY have it?

"It's a tradition to have limited space in Diablo games" is not a good answer. That's a BAD tradition, why would anyone ever wanna keep bad traditions.

[cuafpr]

The inability to run hell+ dungeons solo will kill D4 for me, it's going to be bad enough with multiplayer aspects forced. I want a private game, and let me run all content solo as Diablo should be, with option multiple player that increases loot/rewards

[Ehrenpanzer]

Not necessarily if many of those people wouldn't play the online version. It's like PoE and having SSF (solo self found) separate from trade-league (actually multiplayer), which despite the game being online-only (It's F2P after all) SSF is functionally a solo experience.

Diablo is a franchise that was built initially on the solo experience, and it should remain an option for folks that don't want to be forced to play their full-priced game online if they don't want to.

We went down with that ship with D3

[Volm]

Very much looking forward to the new game hopefully will be good content and while coming out warzone play it

[bbr]

ESO does it well.
If you do damage, you get loot, you get kill credit.

Even if it was just 1-2 points of damage on a 10 million hp monster.
You were there, you contributed.
No killstealing.


Sure there will be lazy boys who avoid all the action and tag it at the last moment, but still.

[Utrrabbit]

Is not the store, but other people killing my bounty monsters.
Especially early on in the game when everyone and their mother are playing Diablo 4. I hate wasting time waiting on things in games.

Edit:
Let me add another thing.
FOMO on dailies that I absolutely hated in WoW and is currenlty in Diablo Immortal.

Lmao ok this is a new excuse for being lazy I have heard.

[chiddie]

[/B]

We went down with that ship with D3

No.

With “online” he clearly intended “with other players”.

D3 is online but you can completely avoid playing with other players and enjoy ssf.

As long as in D4 best loot won’t be gated behind group activities like in WoW, it will be 100% fine to me.

I just don’t fokkin want to have to rely on others to do my stuff. Go (not you in particular, in general) play your retarded M+ and leave Diablo out of this crap.

[tikcol]

Feels like diablo 4 will try to be a Lost Ark clone but not really and pull some stops, enter an identity crisis and become less than Diablo and Lost Ark.

[Nymrohd]

The way I understood it, the only thing that is a group activity is world bosses. Everything else can be done solo.

Tbh I wish we had mercenaries/companions.

[chiddie]

The way I understood it, the only thing that is a group activity is world bosses. Everything else can be done solo.

Tbh I wish we had mercenaries/companions.

It should be world bosses only, yes, but I don’t think they will have exclusive loot (or if they have but it’s only cosmetics, who cares).

Events can be also completed in groups if someone passes by but it’s not mandatory.

I am quite sure followers/mercs will pop up sometime in the future.

[Strawberry]

Lmao ok this is a new excuse for being lazy I have heard.

Huh?

/10char

[Utrrabbit]

Huh?

/10char

"I hate wasting time in a video game"

THAT IS THE POINT OF A VIDEO GAME. TO WASTE TIME SPENDING IT VEGGING OUT.