| Forum Index > General Games |
|
pure_protoss
152 Posts
Wizard because spells are so nice. WD because minions are cool and the Soul stealing spell is a nice mechanic. Barbarian because of OP Whirlwind, DH because she is like Vayne in LoL. Monk is the only champion that I dont see as appealing at all...I played everychamp through the beta like 10-15 times except the monk like 2 times because of how boring he is...he is a pale version of diablo2 assasins mixed with the pally and Lee Sin in LoL. | ||
|
Avalain
Canada308 Posts
On April 19 2012 20:32 Tryhat wrote: S...so you have to change an option so you can place your skills where you want? Why not leave it open in the first place? Why not ANY hints about this or a BIG FUCKING warning sign that says "YOU ARE CURRENTLY PLAYING WITH A GIMPED SETUP. PLEASE CHANGE SETTINGS IF YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO HAVE A CHANCE AT BEING USEFUL". This is beyond retarded. Why, why, why, why, why, why, why would they do this? They put in the system simply to guide new players into workable skill builds (if you can really call them builds at this point). They put it as the default because they figured the people who are too stupid to figure out which skills to get will need all the help they can get, while people who want elective mode on will be smart enough to find it and set it themselves. I guess you proved them wrong on that second part. Hopefully they do have some sort of hint in the game. Personally, I hope they ask you in the beginning if you are a new player or experienced, and then default it accordingly. Personally, I really can't see why they need to be so heavy handed with guiding new players. In Diablo 2 I can understand, because when you pick your skills you're stuck with them, and new players can easily play themselves into unworkable builds. That isn't the case here, so it doesn't make a ton of sense. Still, at least elective mode is available so it doesn't affect me any. My guess is that weapons will give the same bonuses to every skill so as not to make any item or skill unfair. So there will be linearity with item strength. One item will simply be better than another item, and that's the item you wanna have. Mark my words. I've actually heard that weapons are going to give bonuses to specific skills. So you'll find gear that is only good if you're using arcane orb, for example. Between that and the fact that armour stats are random and the fact that top random gear will actually be more powerful than unique gear means that linearity isn't necessarily going to happen. Also, there is a penalty for switching out skills. When you kill an elite you will get a bonus to your magic find. This bonus disappears as soon as you switch out skills. They're still working out exactly how much of a bonus and how much the bonus will stack, but I'd say that's a fairly good incentive to keep with one build...or at least one build per play session. Personally, I really like the skill system. I like that new skills/runes unlock every single level. I like that you aren't punished simply because you wanted to try out that interesting looking new skill (and finding out that you hate it). You can try different builds to see what works for you and what is fun instead of having to go online to find builds that actually work well because you have to plan your build way before you even get to try any of the skills out. If you want consequences to your actions, play hardcore. I'm pretty sure hardcore mode makes you pay for the consequences of your actions at a level basically unrivaled with any other modern video game. Skill customization is fantastic! You say no customization, but how exactly are you going to fit something like 85 skills into 6 slots without some level of choice? Yes, it's completely likely that there will be certain skills that will work best in certain situations, such as boss fights. However, most of the game is not a boss fight AND the best gear is going to drop off of random elites, not bosses. It's impossible for everyone to have the perfect build for every single random encounter even if you can swap out all of the time. As for your comment about how if a group of monsters is too difficult for your current setup you just swap our your skills, what's wrong with that? Are you saying that it's more fun to be completely stuck so that you have to restart the game or, in some cases, completely recreate your character? Yay, what fun! Realistically, the worst that you should encounter for a roadblock is one where you have to go back and level and/or gear up before you can pass it. You could also have to run away, reconsider your skills, come up with a new set of skills to deal with the situation, and go back to try again. That sounds cerebral to me. What you want is for people to be prescient, which is a lot of ask if you really think about it. Also, remember that the ability to swap out skills means that Blizzard can create fights that can only be defeated with certain builds. In Diablo 2 they would have to be a bit more generic because no character would have access to all skills. Of course, they do still need to make the game playable for every class, but that still gives them more flexibility in designing boss fights. | ||
|
Quenchiest
Canada286 Posts
On April 20 2012 00:25 pure_protoss wrote: For me its Wizard>WD>Barbarian>DH>Monk Wizard because spells are so nice. WD because minions are cool and the Soul stealing spell is a nice mechanic. Barbarian because of OP Whirlwind, DH because she is like Vayne in LoL. Monk is the only champion that I dont see as appealing at all...I played everychamp through the beta like 10-15 times except the monk like 2 times because of how boring he is...he is a pale version of diablo2 assasins mixed with the pally and Lee Sin in LoL. The Monk seemed iffy to me too until I realized there was elective mode. Now there's crazy builds I've come up with that I can't wait to try. | ||
|
dmfg
United Kingdom591 Posts
So, I'm actually expecting for the exact opposite from you, that there will be lots and lots of monsters that are immune to certain builds, or near impossible for melee, or near impossible for ranged, etc, and which will require teamwork to take down. I'd expect soloing to require lots of boss skipping due to unbeatable combos. At the end of the day, I don't think it's Blizzard's job to make sure "the game is playable for every class". I think it's our job to find a way to play the game they make with every class. | ||
|
Avalain
Canada308 Posts
On April 20 2012 00:25 pure_protoss wrote: For me its Wizard>WD>Barbarian>DH>Monk Wizard because spells are so nice. WD because minions are cool and the Soul stealing spell is a nice mechanic. Barbarian because of OP Whirlwind, DH because she is like Vayne in LoL. Monk is the only champion that I dont see as appealing at all...I played everychamp through the beta like 10-15 times except the monk like 2 times because of how boring he is...he is a pale version of diablo2 assasins mixed with the pally and Lee Sin in LoL. This is interesting because I'm exactly like you except I have the exact opposite view of the Monk. I actually went from WD>Wizard>Monk>Barbarian>DH from when I first played the beta to Monk>Wizard>WD>Barbarian>DH since playing them all post-patch 15 (or was it 16 with the runes?). I found the monk to be a ton of fun. Diving into packs of monsters with tempest rush or sniping summoners with dashing strike. I prefer faster attacks over slower, more powerful ones. Demon Hunter isn't appealing for me at all because I've never been a fan of traps and if I'm going to be ranged I'd prefer to be tossing magic rather than arrows. | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
I haven't even played the beta (which probably doesn't give a good indicator of this anyhow), but simply from what I've read I feel like there will be 3-4 builds that the community thinks are "optimal" for each class. Whether or not these are truly the "optimal" builds will be debatable, but the perception will be that you need to be using one of these cookie-cutter builds, or you aren't pulling your weight for the group (something somewhat akin to MMOs). I get D3 isn't an MMO with set roles, everyone is or can be "dps" basically, but if it is anything like Diablo 2, how fast you kill things and move on will be the most valuable thing, and if you can't keep up, you get left behind. I'm worried that this will lead to very carbon-copy style characters, particularly in the early game and at max level, that all use the same skill sets, and simply copy a build from the internet, then try to fill in the gear the way the internet tells them to (which stats to focus, etc). I could be jumping ahead of myself, but I don't want to be "punished" or forced to play alone if I don't just copy an internet build. | ||
|
pure_protoss
152 Posts
On April 20 2012 01:38 Quenchiest wrote: The Monk seemed iffy to me too until I realized there was elective mode. Now there's crazy builds I've come up with that I can't wait to try. In fact, I never tried the elective mode at all...I play in the beta since early patches (5-6 I think) back when there was the cauldron of jordan and stuff. Therefore, when they added the new skills system, I decided to play with it. Maybe I should try the elective mode but for the moment, I try not to over-play the beta anymore than I already did so that I still have the hype around that game on May 15th! hehe | ||
|
Avalain
Canada308 Posts
On April 20 2012 01:40 dmfg wrote: They had no problem making fights (or even entire acts) that couldn't be solod in D2 by certain builds. Act 1 hell was an exercise in frustration if you played in a fire druid or pure fire sorc, and most uniques came with 2+ immunities. So, I'm actually expecting for the exact opposite from you, that there will be lots and lots of monsters that are immune to certain builds, or near impossible for melee, or near impossible for ranged, etc, and which will require teamwork to take down. I'd expect soloing to require lots of boss skipping due to unbeatable combos. At the end of the day, I don't think it's Blizzard's job to make sure "the game is playable for every class". I think it's our job to find a way to play the game they make with every class. Yes, maybe I'm being naive but I get the impression that Blizzard wants to remove "exercises in frustration". That's part of the point of allowing people to switch their build. Hitting a wall at level 50 because you didn't pick certain skills at level 5 isn't generally considered fun. I also don't expect this game to be impossible to play solo because, at it's core, this is a single player game. It's not an MMO. Who knows? I could be wrong, though I can at least guarantee that everyone will be able to make it through the game once (aka normal mode) by themselves. No, it is absolutely Bizzards job to make sure the game is playable for every class. It's our job to find out HOW, but it's their job to provide the tools to make it possible. For example, how about if the skeleton king knocked down both bridges instead of just 1 at the end of the beta? The only way across is to use an ability like the Barbarians Leap, or Wizards Teleport. Except the Wizard has to get to level 22 to get Teleport and will be at level 8 when they first get to the skeleton king. Witch Doctors are just completely screwed and can never progress past content they reach at level 8. This is extreme, but my point is that Blizzard can quite literally make the game unplayable for certain races. This is something they will want to avoid at all costs simply because of the backlash it would cause. Yes, it's possible that there can be elites that have to be skipped when you solo, but not bosses. Beating bosses is generally required to progress anyway. But now they can do something like make the Act 1 boss fire immune or something similar, because everyone will be able to work around it. You also won't find something like an entire act filled with nothing but melee immune monsters. Every class will have a chance to get through the game. | ||
|
Quenchiest
Canada286 Posts
On April 20 2012 02:16 HardlyNever wrote: I'm starting to get a little concerned about the "cookie-cutterness" of builds, and more specifically, feeling like your character is in anyway unique. I haven't even played the beta (which probably doesn't give a good indicator of this anyhow), but simply from what I've read I feel like there will be 3-4 builds that the community thinks are "optimal" for each class. Whether or not these are truly the "optimal" builds will be debatable, but the perception will be that you need to be using one of these cookie-cutter builds, or you aren't pulling your weight for the group (something somewhat akin to MMOs). I get D3 isn't an MMO with set roles, everyone is or can be "dps" basically, but if it is anything like Diablo 2, how fast you kill things and move on will be the most valuable thing, and if you can't keep up, you get left behind. I'm worried that this will lead to very carbon-copy style characters, particularly in the early game and at max level, that all use the same skill sets, and simply copy a build from the internet, then try to fill in the gear the way the internet tells them to (which stats to focus, etc). I could be jumping ahead of myself, but I don't want to be "punished" or forced to play alone if I don't just copy an internet build. It's just the sort of thing these types of games lend themselves to. There will always be people out there who want to optimize and number crunch optimal builds for classes. D2 has become that way, and most class based games that let you choose skills become that way. I don't know that it's even possible to make a bad build though, unless you have elective mode on and you choose no abilities that generate your resource. | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
On April 20 2012 02:16 HardlyNever wrote: I'm starting to get a little concerned about the "cookie-cutterness" of builds, and more specifically, feeling like your character is in anyway unique. I haven't even played the beta (which probably doesn't give a good indicator of this anyhow), but simply from what I've read I feel like there will be 3-4 builds that the community thinks are "optimal" for each class. Whether or not these are truly the "optimal" builds will be debatable, but the perception will be that you need to be using one of these cookie-cutter builds, or you aren't pulling your weight for the group (something somewhat akin to MMOs). I get D3 isn't an MMO with set roles, everyone is or can be "dps" basically, but if it is anything like Diablo 2, how fast you kill things and move on will be the most valuable thing, and if you can't keep up, you get left behind. I'm worried that this will lead to very carbon-copy style characters, particularly in the early game and at max level, that all use the same skill sets, and simply copy a build from the internet, then try to fill in the gear the way the internet tells them to (which stats to focus, etc). I could be jumping ahead of myself, but I don't want to be "punished" or forced to play alone if I don't just copy an internet build. First, in RPGs relying on stats/skills there is no way to avoid "optimal" builds and cookie-cutter builds. There will be some builds that are considered the best. The thing about D3 is that you still have room to do something else. You can experiment without much limitation. The only reward for never changing is the nephalem buff which probably will be not that hard to restack, it only prevents skillswap every 10minutes. If Blizzard does it jobs correctly, there will be non-optimal but viable builds out there for you to enjoy. As for being in a group, unless your character completly suck it is absolutly not a problem if you do 280 dps instead of 300. Since it is not a MMO maybe you bring something else for the groupe and the important factor anyway is to be able to progress without dying. On top of that, there are no metric to know who does what. If you do 100dps instead of 300 however this is another problem, you character just suck and its only logical that you get left behind. You cannot imagine every set of skills among the billions of them to be good. But in the end I doubt you will have carbon copy characters, at least not as much as in a restrictive environment. D2 and WoW have proved it, a lot of player being restricted in their choice will automaticly search for the most optimal one. Also there isn't many synergies in D3 skills and no requirement between them, it avoid the problem of one skill implying another. | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
On April 20 2012 02:25 Quenchiest wrote: It's just the sort of thing these types of games lend themselves to. There will always be people out there who want to optimize and number crunch optimal builds for classes. D2 has become that way, and most class based games that let you choose skills become that way. I don't know that it's even possible to make a bad build though, unless you have elective mode on and you choose no abilities that generate your resource. I understand these types of games go this way, and that is fine. I'm thinking specifically of an interview with Jay Wilson (you can find it on youtube, it is a little dated now) where he discusses this at length. He basically says two key things, both of which I agree with: First, in order for there to be good builds, there has to be bad ones(randomly picking skills shouldn't be as good as doing a focused, synergetic build). Second, D3 will be a game about viable builds, not necessarily optimal ones. These are their intended goals, and I like both of them. I guess what I am saying, is that based on what I've seen regarding the game, is that they might have missed these goals, particularly the second one(I'm particularly concerned about what they did with runes, but I understand the thinking behind it). I'm afraid the game may be all about optimal builds, in that not only will there be a small set of optimal builds, but that the vast majority of the player base expects you do copy the optimal builds. I hope this isn't the case, but we'll just have to wait and see I guess. | ||
|
XXXSmOke
United States1333 Posts
On April 19 2012 04:34 Shockk wrote: It's not a MMO. Though D3 won't have a dedicated single player mode, you can play alone, or you can play with friends or party up with strangers. At core, the game is very, very simple: You venture into the world, kill stuff, grab loot, level up, become stronger, kill stronger stuff, grab better loot ... and so forth, and so on. There are "quests" but they're not like those of MMOs; most of them are single-time (as in, each character only does them a single time in their "life" on that respective difficulty). Some may yield rewards like XP, a special item or something else, some may not. While quests will advance the story and may be required to proceed into the next act or a higher difficulty, they're not the game's focus. You'll go through items quickly and often, probably upgrading most item slots several dozen times before settling into a "stable" build at higher difficulty levels. You'll face challenges; if it's anything like D2, even regular monsters on Hell or Inferno will be a threat, champion monsters will be a dangerous hazard and boss monsters will quickly kill you unless approached with the right strategy. If you want to get a first impression, I believe there's a Diablo 1 demo out there on the web. It's old, obviously, with graphics and controls noticeably from the 90s, but at heart the gameplay is the same (and hopefully for D3, the atmosphere is too). Hmmmm, so how can I quest with a group if some of them have already done the quest? if questing isnt the main focus, then what is? I still dont get the join game button, is that like entering the world or joining a seperate part? Sry for the newbness about the game, Ive just never touched it and never thought about it til now. | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
On April 20 2012 03:03 XXXSmOke wrote: Hmmmm, so how can I quest with a group if some of them have already done the quest? if questing isnt the main focus, then what is? I still dont get the join game button, is that like entering the world or joining a seperate part? Sry for the newbness about the game, Ive just never touched it and never thought about it til now. The "join game" and groups are tied together. Think of a game as similar to an "instance" or "dungeon" in an MMO. It resets when no one else is in there. So everytime you create a new game, all the monsters, bosses, etc. respawn. You can jump around from act to act (sort of like chapters) and jump to more specific parts of an act via waypoints (that is how they did it in D2 at least, I believe it is a similar system). You can join a group even if you haven't finished the same quests. People tend to join a group if they are in a game with each other (although this wasn't absolutely required in D2). So if the game is full (4 people) you can assume that you have a 4 person group. The main focus of the game is killing monsters and getting loot(and leveling up, to a lesser extent). Some people like one aspect more than the other. For me, both parts (both the actual act of killing monsters and the reward) have to be fun in order for the game to work. They both were in D2. | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
| ||
|
Quenchiest
Canada286 Posts
On April 20 2012 02:50 HardlyNever wrote: I understand these types of games go this way, and that is fine. I'm thinking specifically of an interview with Jay Wilson (you can find it on youtube, it is a little dated now) where he discusses this at length. He basically says two key things, both of which I agree with: First, in order for there to be good builds, there has to be bad ones(randomly picking skills shouldn't be as good as doing a focused, synergetic build). Second, D3 will be a game about viable builds, not necessarily optimal ones. These are their intended goals, and I like both of them. I guess what I am saying, is that based on what I've seen regarding the game, is that they might have missed these goals, particularly the second one(I'm particularly concerned about what they did with runes, but I understand the thinking behind it). I'm afraid the game may be all about optimal builds, in that not only will there be a small set of optimal builds, but that the vast majority of the player base expects you do copy the optimal builds. I hope this isn't the case, but we'll just have to wait and see I guess. It might hinge on how difficult Blizzard has decided to make their Hell/Inferno modes. With D2, you could do Nightmare with literally any half decent, viable build, but the moment you stepped into Hell your build almost needed to be incredibly specific depending on the class you were playing. Either way, with games maxing out at 4 players you can opt to just play with friends/people who won't care about your build not being a 100% optimized build. I don't ever plan to jump into a game with random people. | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
| ||
|
boppel
140 Posts
On April 20 2012 03:59 skyR wrote: Considering how they think that inferno won't be beaten for a few months, it's probably just going to end up being a gear check... like most of WoW raids pre-nerf. yeah, just MF the shit out of hell and beat inferno, which is in my opinion just another timesink (inferno) | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
for wizard: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/class/wizard/active/ | ||
|
Duckvillelol
Australia1259 Posts
Any ideas/thoughts/comments? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games Organizations Other Games Counter-Strike Other Games StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
WardiTV Qualifier
GSL
Cure vs sOs
SHIN vs ByuN
Replay Cast
GSL
Classic vs Solar
GuMiho vs Zoun
WardiTV Spring Champion…
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Spring Champion…
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
