| Blogs > Mango Chicken |
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
Pretty much any customization you did in Diablo 2 you can do in Diablo 3.... you simply have the ability to change it on the fly instead of being stuck with it. EDIT: To everyone who is disappointed and think D3 is boring: PLEASE, don't play it! We need that server space for those of us who "gets" it  | ||
|
cdpham
United States41 Posts
| ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On May 16 2012 15:13 ETisME wrote: game is still super fun though. but the removal of customisation actually makes the game lacking in depth (that's how I feel anyway) but I think they did it to encourage players to play with skill rather than good stats buildup ownage in pvp? Given how little Blizzard cares about PvP, I doubt they designed the game around it. | ||
|
Glurkenspurk
United States1915 Posts
On May 16 2012 17:35 Tobberoth wrote: Surprised that people are negative, Diablo 3 is lightyears better than Diablo 2 (which isn't surprising since Diablo 2 is a huge overrated PoS). People think there's no customization just because they removed the fact that you're completely locked-in, in Diablo 2 you seriously have to create a character from scratch if you want to try something else. Pretty much any customization you did in Diablo 2 you can do in Diablo 3.... you simply have the ability to change it on the fly instead of being stuck with it. EDIT: To everyone who is disappointed and think D3 is boring: PLEASE, don't play it! We need that server space for those of us who "gets" it you realize they added respecs into diablo 2, right? | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On May 16 2012 19:21 Odal wrote: you realize they added respecs into diablo 2, right? You realize it was a bitch to get several respecs and that in D3 you can literally change your build in the middle of a dungeon, several times? How does your comment matter, at all? | ||
|
Glurkenspurk
United States1915 Posts
On May 16 2012 19:22 Tobberoth wrote: You realize it was a bitch to get several respecs and that in D3 you can literally change your build in the middle of a dungeon, several times? How does your comment matter, at all? Doing the very first quest is a bitch? how? Also your smug posts don't help your obviously wrong delusions. | ||
|
Omnipresent
United States871 Posts
On May 16 2012 19:22 Tobberoth wrote: You realize it was a bitch to get several respecs and that in D3 you can literally change your build in the middle of a dungeon, several times? How does your comment matter, at all? Defensive much? He was just correcting a mistake you made. 3 respecs just for doing crap you're going to do anyway and a really easy (or cheap, if you don't want to grind it) way to get as many more as you want is pretty good. Also, if you think D3 gives you the same level of customization as D2, you didn't do much customizing in D2. I get that you don't like D2, but it was hugely successful and is still pretty popular. People just want to see the some of the features that made it successful in its successor. | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On May 16 2012 19:29 Omnipresent wrote: Defensive much? He was just correcting a mistake you made. 3 respecs just for doing crap you're going to do anyway and a really easy (or cheap, if you don't want to grind it) way to get as many more as you want is pretty good. Also, if you think D3 gives you the same level of customization as D2, you didn't do much customizing in D2. I get that you don't like D2, but it was hugely successful and is still pretty popular. People just want to see the some of the features that made it successful in its successor. Point is that you're not going to be switching between several specs on a character in D2, you made new characters for the specs you wanted. You don't have to do that in D3, you can have tons of builds you like and switch between them whenever you want. It's a pure improvement. I'd love for people to let me know of all the amazing customization they did in D2 which is so superior to how it's done in D3. "Dude, I put more into strength than into vitality because... uh." Awesome customization, gratz. 90% of customizaiton in D2 was pretty much just what your main skills were, which is the exact same in D3. Playing a wizard using diamond armor and spectral blades to fight effectively in close combat is completely different from playing a wizard focusing on teleports and character-centric aoes, which is again completely different from a wizard focusing on range skills. People just like to bitch when developers modernize a concept and take it to a different level. Everything is worse when you're filled with nostalgia. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
If you're familiar with WoW for example there specs, enchants, glyphs, reforging, gemming and maybe more, and far from all of them add any kind of depth to the game. Glyphs for example have been mostly about picking the cookie cutter ones since they came, and gemming is just another extra thing you have to do every time you get a piece of gear. "Sigh, gotta by another round of str/agi/int gems again". Specs is another topic which you can say a lot about, but lets just sum it up with that it hasnt been very interesting (way too many "increase you damage by 3%" talents which are mandatory) but that they're definitely taking a step forward in Mists of Pandaria. Theres quite a few caveats you gotta worry about when adding customization. If you make it so that theres a one good way of customizing and thousands of bad ways, its just becoming a noob trap where you gotta do your googling before you make your character. Diablo2 skills is a good example of that, where the right way to spec was to pump all your points into a few selected skills and leave the rest with 1 point in them where you had to. However, for anyone who didnt immediately figure that out or did his research, you could end up with thousands of random bad raidbow specs with points everywhere (been there, done that myself in my noob D2 days). Then theres the illusion of customization when theres only one good choice. You shouldnt for example make 10 type of gems if every class is just gonna spam his one cookie cutter gem into all gem slots. Then gemming becomes just an added extra annoyance you gotta keep doing with your gear. If you can avoid those (and probably other too) caveats when designing your customization system, and actually make customization interesting, meaningsful and without cookie cutter builds, then it can indeed be a very very good thing. But making stuff customizable doesnt always equal making it better. | ||
|
Glurkenspurk
United States1915 Posts
On May 16 2012 19:53 Kreb wrote: Customization is in many cases a bad thing. What. inventing and experimenting with builds was basically the main reason D2 has so much replay value. And customization is fucking huge in multiplayer RPGs. Nobody grinded loot for the sake of loot. And because of the way D3 works with class specific loot and shit, you're basically going to always have the best "Witch Doctor chest" And not be collecting loot for your blizz sorc, or trading for a nigma to use on your hammerdin. There will be no replay value once you finish inferno. No trying new builds, no nothing. Not to mention that individual skills are so boring that nobody will even want to make builds based around them when the higher level skills look so much cooler. Also the whole mindset of "the illusion of choice" is complete bullshit. The best part of diablo 2 is that you could have tons of fun and be viable with suboptimal builds because it isn't a competitive game. There were so many crazy stats on items and weird skills that you could make completely absurd builds work, even in hell. If anything, diablo 3 is the one with the true illusion of choice. Skill runes and shit are completely boring, and remind me a lot of the shitty bloated talent trees in wotlk WoW. | ||
|
Omnipresent
United States871 Posts
On May 16 2012 19:53 Kreb wrote: People need to stop using the word customization as some kind of holy part of a game which needs to be as high as possible. Customization is in many cases a bad thing. They could allow you to change your character stats, armor stats, weapon stats, specs, sockets, skills, etc, etc. But that wouldnt necessarily make it a better game just because you add all that. If you're familiar with WoW for example there specs, enchants, glyphs, reforging, gemming and maybe more, and far from all of them add any kind of depth to the game. Glyphs for example have been mostly about picking the cookie cutter ones since they came, and gemming is just another extra thing you have to do every time you get a piece of gear. "Sigh, gotta by another round of str/agi/int gems again". Specs is another topic which you can say a lot about, but lets just sum it up with that it hasnt been very interesting (way too many "increase you damage by 3%" talents which are mandatory) but that they're definitely taking a step forward in Mists of Pandaria. Theres quite a few caveats you gotta worry about when adding customization. If you make it so that theres a one good way of customizing and thousands of bad ways, its just becoming a noob trap where you gotta do your googling before you make your character. Diablo2 skills is a good example of that, where the right way to spec was to pump all your points into a few selected skills and leave the rest with 1 point in them where you had to. However, for anyone who didnt immediately figure that out or did his research, you could end up with thousands of random bad raidbow specs with points everywhere (been there, done that myself in my noob D2 days). Then theres the illusion of customization when theres only one good choice. You shouldnt for example make 10 type of gems if every class is just gonna spam his one cookie cutter gem into all gem slots. Then gemming becomes just an added extra annoyance you gotta keep doing with your gear. If you can avoid those (and probably other too) caveats when designing your customization system, and actually make customization interesting, meaningsful and without cookie cutter builds, then it can indeed be a very very good thing. But making stuff customizable doesnt always equal making it better. I think you're confling two different things. There are two types of complexity: complexity that adds depth and complexity that doesn't. You're mostly right about WoW specs. There is pretty much always a right and wrong answer for whatever you're trying to do (not always for pvp, but 95% of the time). Diablo 2 is differen't. Of course, there are obvious specs that make a ton of sense. Something like a blizz or orb scorceress would be a good example. Max the right talents. Pick some flavor. That's about it. Try this though. Boot up your D2 and roll an aura/zeal scorceress. You need a Dream helm/shield, passion phase blade, dragon armor if you want it (though there are better options), a bunch of IAS/survivability gear, and then an infinity merc. Then grab some survival talents and lightning synergies. If you pay careful attention, you can min/max the shit out of something like this. This is a totally off the wall build, and it happens to be ridiculously good. There are dozens of other builds like this. It's true, complexity doesn't guarentee depth. But lets be clear. Blizzard doesn't limit choices because they think it's more fun or a better overall system. They limit choices because it's so hard for them to balance everything if players have too many options. With millions of players trying differen't things, someone will eventually come up with something that is "too good." If you've ever seen the videos of a rogue tanking raid bosses from BC WoW (when BC was live and the content was somewhat relevant), you know what I'm talking about. | ||
|
Kukaracha
France1954 Posts
On May 16 2012 13:17 scintilliaSD wrote: 3) As far as feeling dark goes... I'm just going to leave a few things in a spoiler tag. + Show Spoiler + Halls of Agony Act 1, anyone? How can you compare this shit that looks like a rainbow to... this? ![[image loading]](http://www.diablowiki.net/images/3/37/D2-gore.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://procrast-nation.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/screenshot0191.jpg) | ||
|
SkytoM
Austria1137 Posts
On May 16 2012 04:05 xBillehx wrote: I dunno, I played D2 for years and years and I'm absolutely loving D3 so far. (I'm 22 btw) I like all the little throwbacks and I'm pretty into the story. Most importantly it feels like Diablo to me. I was lucky enough to get in really early and before I knew it I'd been playing for 11 hours. About to go get some sleep and wake up ready for another session.  Same here. Exactly the same here. I'm 21 and i'm lovin' the game. | ||
|
Kreb
4834 Posts
On May 16 2012 20:07 Odal wrote: What. inventing and experimenting with builds was basically the main reason D2 has so much replay value. And customization is fucking huge in multiplayer RPGs. Nobody grinded loot for the sake of loot. And because of the way D3 works with class specific loot and shit, you're basically going to always have the best "Witch Doctor chest" And not be collecting loot for your blizz sorc, or trading for a nigma to use on your hammerdin. There will be no replay value once you finish inferno. No trying new builds, no nothing. Not to mention that individual skills are so boring that nobody will even want to make builds based around them when the higher level skills look so much cooler. Also the whole mindset of "the illusion of choice" is complete bullshit. The best part of diablo 2 is that you could have tons of fun and be viable with suboptimal builds because it isn't a competitive game. There were so many crazy stats on items and weird skills that you could make completely absurd builds work, even in hell. If anything, diablo 3 is the one with the true illusion of choice. Skill runes and shit are completely boring, and remind me a lot of the shitty bloated talent trees in wotlk WoW. Somewhat strange post. First you quote a statement of mine in its lonliness and mostly ignore my further arguments for why said statements is true. Also, you seem to think Im shitting in D2, which definitely makes me think you read what you want to read (you see something you dont agree with and then you assume that Im challenging your opinion on D2, which Im not). I didnt even comment on your opinion on D2. I didnt comment D2 at all but mentioning one example from it. I commented on customization and the design of it overall. But onto your post. What you call replay value, I call time sink. Everyone is obviously entitled to their own opinion, but I hardly belieave it was the lvl 1 to lvl ~80 experience you replayed the content for. You replayed it because you had to. Had there been a choice to either respec to another spec and stay at same level, I dare say you'd use that choice over levelling from scrach for "replay value". The fact that Blizz eventually added respeccability also indicates they admitted it being a drawback not being included in the first place. Then you continue to complain about the D3 system, sort of indicating that I preferred it. Actually, I do, but nothing in my first post mentioned D3 at all, so Im not sure why you drag D3 into it. And my paragraph about "illuison of choice" had, once again, nothing to do with D2. Again: I was talking general design. The best example of illusion of choice I can come to think of is WoW glyphs (which you hopefully know of since you seemed to know of worlk talents). I mean today if I log on my mage I have something like ~10 prime glyphs I can choose from, affecting something along the lines of: fireball, pyroblast, living bomb, arcane blast, arcane missiles, mage armor, frost bolt, ice lance, deep freeze. Now guess which three ones you use for the specs fire, arcane and frost respectively. (Note: I know theres a few more glyphs, but this is actually scarily close to how prime glyphs are). Now THATS an illusion of choice. The one thing you do argue though is that "The best part of diablo 2 is that you could have tons of fun and be viable with suboptimal builds because it isn't a competitive game. ". Credit where credit is due, this does actually relate to my post, so I'll answer to that. And my answer is that the reason you have fun with suboptimal specs (viability is a very subjective word so not gonna touch that. Something being viable or not depends entirely on what you're trying to accomplish with it) was because it offered other things. One such thing being change. Change is something that humans very much enjoy, since repeating the same thing over and over again often gets boring. Thus, change can cause new interest to occur even though you're not as effective as before the change. Another reason why you might enjoy suboptimal specs is because you dont know better. I know I had tons of fun with my rainbow Sorc spec in D2 first time I played. Killing every monster took a lot of work, and I liked it. However, as I learned to play and got better, theres very little to go back to. I dare you to make a new D2 char, spec anything between 2 and 7 points into all skills, play it and consider it fun. Trust me, you wont. And the reason you wont is because you know better. Introduce a friend to play on the same char (who never played D2 before) and its entirely possible hes gonna have a blast. Because he DOES NOT know better. Another reason why you might enjoy it is because of challenge. After having completed the game with a cookie cutter spec, many people enjoy putting restrictions on themselves to increase challenge. If you've done Hell with your Hammerdin, maybe you enjoy starting a new Paladin and using an inferior build because of that. In summry: The reason you enjoy playing suboptimal specs almost surely because of other reason than it actually being suboptimal, such as change or not knowing better. Im not gonna use the word "entirely" but rather "almost surely", since "enjoying" is also very sujective and everyone may have a unique reason for enjoying something. But what I say does go for a majority of people, and thus thats what you target your design towards. You dont make games to amuse those few players out there who enjoy doing weird stuff, you make games which appeals the masses. And the masses dont enjoy running around with suboptimal specs. ------- For more of a D2 vs D3 debate, which you seem to want, you might enjoy this: http://www.sirlin.net/blog/2012/5/3/diablo-3s-ability-system.html I largely agree with it. But once again my post was about customization design in general, not about D2 or D3. | ||
|
unkkz
Norway2196 Posts
Not to mention the decisions going in to what you actually get. I want to have 7 abilitie sit seems but i can only get 6, so one has to go. It's a crefully weighted decision. And to the Op: You've played five hours aka youre still in normal and youre bitching about not dying? Its all very drop depend aswell, you have bad drops you take tons more dmg and things take alot longer to kill. You get good drops you two shot everything. | ||
|
MetalMarine
United States1559 Posts
| ||
|
TheToast
United States4808 Posts
On May 16 2012 15:13 ETisME wrote: game is still super fun though. but the removal of customisation actually makes the game lacking in depth (that's how I feel anyway) but I think they did it to encourage players to play with skill rather than good stats buildup ownage in pvp? I don't doubt that the game is fun, I do intend to play it at some point (when the price comes down). But to me it's just missing the things that really made D2 exceptional. It's missing the things that made D2 stand out amist the deluge of very very similar RPGs that were all coming out at the same time. So, it's only natural that devoted RPG fans are pretty dissapointed in the game. I felt the same way when they turned the Fallout series (F2 is arguably the best turn based RPG ever made) into a Deus Ex style FPS. The final product was good, but it wasn't Fallout anymore, it was something else. On May 16 2012 20:07 Odal wrote: What. inventing and experimenting with builds was basically the main reason D2 has so much replay value. And customization is fucking huge in multiplayer RPGs. Yes. Don't get me wrong, I like action RPGs too. Dungeon Siege 2 had just about the single best action-RPG gameplay system, it was loads of fun. But when your stats are getting auto assigned and your only real character build options are choosing from a linear set of skills; it's not really an RPG anymore. It's something closer to a third person action game like Prince of Persia or Max Payne. There's nothing inherently wrong with that type of a game; as I said DS2 was loads of fun. But it's different with D3: they took one of the most popular RPGs of all time and turned it into a third person action game. Real RPGs can be so much fun; getting invested in a character, building them up, tweaking states, grinding out levels, trolling for loot, and the payoff when you get that sweet new item or ability that let's you smash your foes into oblivion. But "kids these days" don't appreciate that, and as such true RPGs are slowly dying out in favor of third person action games that are mislabeled as RPGs. The D3 redesign is just one more nail into that coffine, and it shouldn't be surprising to anyone that real RPG fans are dissapointed and feel a bit betrayed by Blizzard. On May 16 2012 23:09 MetalMarine wrote: I'm not surprised that some people aren't feeling D3... Blizzard's quality has gone down the drain guys (look at sc2). I kind of knew this was coming. The D3 hype was from the community that supported D1 and D2 because they were really fun. These supporters expected D3 to be amazing just like how BW supporters expected SC2 to be amazing... R.I.P Blizzard, you were a great company that I loved. It's not so much that the game is bad, it's that they took out away was made D2 so good. WoW killed the traditional RPG, millions of people played WoW and so now every game company is going to try to mirror WoW. I can't blame them, it's the dumbed down nature of WoW that made it so popular. Most people don't want to build a character, spend time tweaking stats, or having quests with 10 different ways to solve them (think FO2) that actually require you to use your brain. They want to fly around on a fucking wyvern or gryffon or whatever. That's fine I suppose. But obviously real RPG fans aren't going to be terribly happy about it. | ||
|
JiSu
Korea (South)140 Posts
On May 16 2012 23:36 TheToast wrote: I don't doubt that the game is fun, I do intend to play it at some point (when the price comes down). But to me it's just missing the things that really made D2 exceptional. It's missing the things that made D2 stand out amist the deluge of very very similar RPGs that were all coming out at the same time. So, it's only natural that devoted RPG fans are pretty dissapointed in the game. I felt the same way when they turned the Fallout series (F2 is arguably the best turn based RPG ever made) into a Deus Ex style FPS. The final product was good, but it wasn't Fallout anymore, it was something else. Yes. Don't get me wrong, I like action RPGs too. Dungeon Siege 2 had just about the single best action-RPG gameplay system, it was loads of fun. But when your stats are getting auto assigned and your only real character build options are choosing from a linear set of skills; it's not really an RPG anymore. It's something closer to a third person action game like Prince of Persia or Max Payne. There's nothing inherently wrong with that type of a game; as I said DS2 was loads of fun. But it's different with D3: they took one of the most popular RPGs of all time and turned it into a third person action game. Real RPGs can be so much fun; getting invested in a character, building them up, tweaking states, grinding out levels, trolling for loot, and the payoff when you get that sweet new item or ability that let's you smash your foes into oblivion. But "kids these days" don't appreciate that, and as such true RPGs are slowly dying out in favor of third person action games that are mislabeled as RPGs. The D3 redesign is just one more nail into that coffine, and it shouldn't be surprising to anyone that real RPG fans are dissapointed and feel a bit betrayed by Blizzard. It's not so much that the game is bad, it's that they took out away was made D2 so good. WoW killed the traditional RPG, millions of people played WoW and so now every game company is going to try to mirror WoW. I can't blame them, it's the dumbed down nature of WoW that made it so popular. Most people don't want to build a character, spend time tweaking stats, or having quests with 10 different ways to solve them (think FO2) that actually require you to use your brain. They want to fly around on a fucking wyvern or gryffon or whatever. That's fine I suppose. But obviously real RPG fans aren't going to be terribly happy about it. I can't help but laugh at your last paragraph about companies mirroring WoW to dumb down people and instead of using their brains they want to fly around on a fucking wyvern or gryffon. It is so true. Blizzard is dumbing down everything, taking all the skills and fun out. Same with SC2. There is such a huge skills difference between BW and SC2, which made BW so entertaining not to just play and participate in the game but to observe. I haven't played D3 yet but I guess since they took out customization of stats in a game, I can see that the game won't last long. All they are gonna do is update patches and items and other trash, which are not the main reasons why playing real RPG is fun. | ||
|
TheToast
United States4808 Posts
On May 17 2012 01:37 JiSu wrote: I can't help but laugh at your last paragraph about companies mirroring WoW to dumb down people and instead of using their brains they want to fly around on a fucking wyvern or gryffon. It is so true. Blizzard is dumbing down everything, taking all the skills and fun out. Same with SC2. There is such a huge skills difference between BW and SC2, which made BW so entertaining not to just play and participate in the game but to observe. I haven't played D3 yet but I guess since they took out customization of stats in a game, I can see that the game won't last long. All they are gonna do is update patches and items and other trash, which are not the main reasons why playing real RPG is fun. I don't necessarily diagree, but there is a difference. SC2 at least kept the same spirit as BW, unit design and controls may be different but it's kept most of the same aspects. Honestly it would have been wierd if SC2 didn't have the option to do things like bind multiple buildings to a single hotkey, allow binding more than 12 units to a single hotkey: those things are pretty standard in modern RTS games. Remember that when BW came out, it did a lot of things with the UI that were big changes from it's predecessors. For example grouping 12 units instead of 8, hotkeying camera locations, and I'm not sure entirely but I don't think you could hotkey buildings in WC2? Intentionally leaving out features that are now standard in RTS UIs just to make the game harder would probably have earned them some terrible reviews and I think you wouldn't have nearly the size of the player base that you have now. But as I say, I don't think that allowing players to queue up unit movement waypoints, for example, is drastically changing what Starcraft is. If they had done something like put WC3 style hero units in the game, that would be more analogous. The D3 gameplay mechanics fundamentally changed the type of game it is, how it plays, replayability, etc. | ||
|
storkfan
493 Posts
On May 16 2012 00:45 m3rciless wrote: dull grey scenery? What game are you playing? It isn't my little pony, but all ultra settings the game has an awesomely vibrant feel to it. yeah. is WoW gray? i kinda dont understand this.. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
The PondCast
OSC
IntoTheTV X SOOP
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Mixu vs TBD
Spirit vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs Shuttle
BeSt vs Rush
WardiTV Weekly
Afreeca Starleague
Leta vs ggaemo
Jaedong vs Queen
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
