Diablo III General Discussion - Page 13

On October 25 2010 14:40 o3.power91 wrote:

I hope this doesn't happen. This is part of the reason I loved D2 so much. I'm so hyped up for D3 but no way am I paying a subscription fee for a non-MMORPG.

Hell, I won't even want to pay a subscription fee for an MMORPG -_-

On October 25 2010 15:52 eggs wrote:


i was playing the demos with a group of 4, and 4 seemed like too much honestly. it was frustrating getting through doorways so we just split up into 2 pairs until we spawned the events/bosses. keep in mind that you get individual loot drops, so when you split up and clear different rooms you have to go back to what the other guys cleared to see your loot. at blizzcon the playtime was limited and the characters were throwaways so i didn't care too much about drops, but in a real game it would not be fun to play in a game with 8 people spreading out and then going through the entire empty dungeon just to make sure you didn't miss a Unique.

On October 25 2010 17:24 protoss22 wrote:


Diablo 1 had 3 classes available, 4 per game max
Diablo 2 had 7 classes available, 8 per game max
Diablo 3 has 5 classes announced, 4 per game max

I strongly disagree with you that 4 players per game seems like too much. The problem you mentioned seemed to have an easy solution, make the mobs harder (more hp or more resistance) for games with more players, which is what Diablo 2 already does. If you are in a multiplayer game and you choose to split up into groups of 2 or 1, shouldn't you be playing singleplayer instead. I understand it is a demo and you don't necessarily want to do teamwork but rather just explore as much as you can as fast as you can. But the ability to play together with lots of players would add an immense amount of value to the game.

On October 25 2010 17:24 protoss22 wrote:But the ability to play together with lots of players would add an immense amount of value to the game.

On October 25 2010 18:12 eggs wrote:


it does scale with more HP and more damage with more people in game. the problem is the game has a lot of narrow hallways and doorways that only 1 mob/player fit through at a time. it's not as wide open as D2 was, and your abilities don't have the range or radius of effect that they do in D2.
there's no wide open areas like the "overworld" type areas in D2. think of it as the entire game progresses in maps like in the catacombs or caves. there's no cow level where 8 bowazons can multishot together with great efficiency.

at blizzcon they sent everyone off in groups of 4. it was up to each person whether they would join the mini-lan group of 4 or play single player. i went through a couple times. the first time we had 2 barbs and 2 monks, and 4 melee just didn't work well together.
it would be fine with 5 or 6 players if only 2 were melee and the other 3 or 4 were ranged. but 5 or 6 melee would just not be fun. only 2 or 3 of the players would be able to hit the enemies, which are scaled to do more damage and have more hp due to more players in game.

also the Battle Arenas were 3 vs 3, so the game can handle 6 players. but they know from a gameplay standpoint that 4 players in PvM plays better than 5 or 6.

On October 25 2010 17:07 Barrin wrote:


key word highlighted

On October 25 2010 18:20 eggs wrote:


just thought id single this part out and disagree. it's not D2. you really need to play it at least once to realize the game won't just be D2 with higher resolution, much like SC2 isnt BW with pretty 3D renders. it'll alienate some hardcore fans that like 1 certain aspect of the older game like PK'ers or MF-runners, but it'll be more enjoyable for the majority.
at the Q&A some guy said he thinks they were making a mistake by not embracing e-sports with D3, and the entire crowd boo'd him, yelling out things like "go back to WoW."

if you want to play together with lots of players, perhaps you'd prefer an MMO with 25-man raids and 40v40 Battlegrounds.

On October 25 2010 18:25 protoss22 wrote:


How can from a gameplay standpoint that 4 players PvM is better than 5 or 6?
Doesn't having 5 or 6 enable the ability to have 4 players in PvM?
I personally have more than 3 friends (each with at least 1 "addon" friend) who are waiting for Diablo 3 to upgrade their computers to play.

On October 25 2010 18:27 ricerocket wrote:
i never found D2 games with more than 4 or 5 people to be much fun, it's either everybody together made the screen too busy, and my own actions didn't feel like it had an impact, or people spread out on different maps and it ended up being just a 3~4 people group anyway

sure it may be silly that you can't see all 5 classes in a single game, but it's sillier to judge your playing experience from an obituary number at this point... besides, as they said with how many different distinct builds each class have with different skills choices and runes, the combination is endless... would you be upset we don't have an 256 player cap because you wanted all those different builds in the same game too?

On October 25 2010 18:31 protoss22 wrote:


I want the game to have more slots than the number of classes available, not the number of combination of builds nor number of fingers on your hands

*edit 8 would be great, 4 would be poor

On October 25 2010 18:36 eggs wrote:


that's so arbitrary. what if the developers decided that instead of having 3 specs for each of the 5 classes they'd just ship the game with 15 classes of 1 spec each? would you instantly want it to have a 15 player cap then?

On October 25 2010 18:36 ricerocket wrote:
and I want the game to spill out a Benjamin every time I click the mouse.

the point I was trying to make is that the number of classes can be nothing more than an arbitrary number in relation to the end result: your playing experience.