On May 01 2012 19:01 ffreakk wrote:On May 01 2012 17:27 killa_robot wrote:On April 24 2012 00:35 zJayy962 wrote:On April 24 2012 00:02 c0ldfusion wrote:On April 23 2012 23:52 fighter2_40 wrote:On April 23 2012 19:31 Ace1123 wrote:
5/5 For Me. it is really fun and i Like how the diablo feel was preserved. The graphics are also good and of course the new changes are awesome. I just hope there will be more classes in the future -_-
3/5.
really? i felt the exact opposite. i felt like i was playing a tweeked dragonage/runescape game for 12 year olds. Where is the darkness/ raw feel of diablo 2? There is too much lighting, too little blood, and the items look like shit in the inventory. Diablo 2 from like a decade ago had better inventory graphics. It's retarded.
Also, people are saying that the game will be good because it's harder later on, but Is it going to be in the way that EVERYTHING is dependent on items (which blizzard wants to monopolize on) or because you'll need to plan out your character build? (shitty hdins/well planned casters could do well even w/ poor mans gear in d2). My guess is the former since every character will be exactly the same in that they are not specialized by skill trees. The only defining factor is your passives and your items.
I'm only hoping they fix these issues before destroying my childhood.
Agreed.
I wish I had read your post before posting in the other thread.
That's the real problem of the current skill system - end game will be 100% item dependent.
No build commitment means that either everyone will be viable in the endgame or only those with elite gear will be. I'm guessing with so much emphasis placed on things like crafting and RMAH, it'll be the latter.
Just curious, did you guys play and enjoy diablo 2?
If you wanted to clear content alone, every character/build was extremely gear dependent. Hammerdins are probably the only exception but it'd be pretty hard to solo any boss as a Hammerdin in Hell with shitty gear which is what you needed to do to get gear in the first place.
Just because you couldn't solo hell bosses naked that doesn't mean gear was extremely important,at least not for casters. I remember several times dying in hell and being able to kill several monsters using magic without my gear on just to reach my body. In D3, you are completely powerless without gear. Even magic relies solely on your weapon damage to determine how much damage you'll do. If you have a shitty weapon(or none at all), then it doesn't matter if you're using your end game spells or early game spells, you'll do shit all for damage either way.
Personally I don't think I'll get the game anymore, or at the very least I'm going to wait until a few weeks after it's release to make my final decision. I was able to play in the open beta weekend and it just felt....aimless.
I mean, I won't praise the D2 skill system as being awesome, but at the very least it gave you something to look forward to with each level. Each level you either gained a new skill, or you improved an old one. In D3, you get a predetermined skill or rune-skill. Often times I would level up in the beta, look at what it gave me, and be like.....meh, I don't want that, and just ignore the new skill. I just didn't feel excited or even happy like when I leveled up in D2. Not too mention the fact that due to you always getting the same skills, there's no need for you two make a second character of the same class.
There's also the stat allocation. Granted, I don't really care that they took that away too much, but at the very least my level 9 wizard shouldn't have identical health to my level 9 barbarian. It's just odd that each character gets the same vitality; two points every level, and 10 health per point, for every class.
I played the demon hunter, barb, and wizard for the beta. Demon hunter I had fun with, and felt was pretty strong. Wizard was pretty meh, and I didn't like the barb (died too often with him). Then again I rarely like melee characters.
Finally there's the complete dependency on equipment. I enjoyed the fact that in D2 I could get along fine as a caster without a decent weapon. It made sense, after all casters use magic, not weapons, to hurt their enemies. But in D3 you need a good weapon, otherwise your magic is useless. Furthermore it can be any weapon, which just feels weird. Why would my wizard carrying a club make an ice beam that does more damage than her having no weapon? What would the amount of damage that club is supposed to do when you bash someone with it have to do with the amount of damage that your ice beam does?
Also a bit disappointed that resistances seem to be taking a backseat now. You can only see them by opening up that advanced tab, and with blizzard wanting to make as many builds as possible work, I think we won't be seeing many creatures be completely resistant to certain types of magic, and we won't be needing resistances like we needed previously. Though this is mainly speculation as it was pretty early in the game.
Game does look good, and the production value of it is clearly high. I just don't think I would enjoy it.
Hmm..
You said you died too many times with a Barb in Beta. I take it you are a casual player then, and won't go in-depth into the more subtle differences.
What skill did you improve and/or look forward to from level 1 to 23 when you played Lightning Fury Amazon again?
lvl 1-29 for Whirlwind Barb?
lvl 1-29 Fury Druid?
the list could go on.
See, with the new system, you get a new Skill every level (which is more than you can say for Diablo 2). Now you may or may not choose to use it, but the option is there. And you say it as if it was better in Diablo 2: "w00t level 6, now what skills did i get? Double Swing, Taunt?.. meh, back to basic attacks
" (and let's not forget that the next time you get something new is lvl 12)
The new system improves our strength with your gear. And what's difficult to understand about how your magical weapons empower the skills that you use?
Most of your concern (how you cant do dmg w/o items, etc) seem to basically converge to 1 point: "This game is different from Diablo 2", and yes it is. However, you don't see to point out how those differences are bad.
In Diablo 3, more than just your skills, more gears define your build (especially at higher levels). So I believe that point is rather moot, about how one need only switch skills and he has a new character. If you switch gears too, then it's about the same for every game (in Diablo 2, you can switch your skills in 10 minutes, in the past, it used to take ~3 hours).
And lol at the guy you quoted. Hammerdin the only class to be able to clear Hell without good gear? Evidently one of those guys who reads a few forums posts on the internet, seeing "Hammerdin OP" here and there, and proceed to talk like a master of the game. For the record, Zookeeper Nec can clear Hell naked, Trapsin, most Sorcs, Tesladin, Fireclaw Bear, and many more classes can clear Hell just as effectively, if not even more so than Hammerdin.
EPT
