|
On April 22 2012 02:05 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 01:09 dmfg wrote:On April 22 2012 00:37 paralleluniverse wrote:On April 21 2012 21:04 Pr0wler wrote:On April 21 2012 19:42 Nilrem wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 21 2012 11:34 pellejohnson wrote:
The absolutely worst part with D3 is the change to the skill system. Did they really have to dumb it down this much? I mean it feels so wrong not really having any choice leveling up, feels like everything is auto, what skills you get, what stats go up and the runes. What happened to actually tweaking your character using different builds? What happened to the amazing discussions whether this extra point in this skill over that other skill was worth it or not.
No sorry but I can't say I'm too pleased with these changes, also the max players = 4 is terrible considering that I have a group of 5 friends who would love to play together but right now one of us have to skip playing every single session... I sort of disagree. Diablo 2 is a game that gives off the sense of allowing an exuberant amount of freedom. Unfortunately, that freedom is only a mask since the game itself is limiting. Take for example the attributes; you can place the points where ever you want. But for you to get gear needed to be at least descent, you have to put X amount of points into Y. It gave off the illusion of being free but in reality, you are constrained by gear and the general fact that you can easily gimp your hero. Once you put the points in, there is no turning back and down the line (end game content, which is the important content), you will end up deleting the hero and starting over again. Since there is a glimmer of "right" way. The same is for the skill system. It gives off the illusion of being free but you are actually restricted, it is more restrictive and linear than the Diablo III system. The reason for this is simple, you do get to choose three choices; good job. Now, you have to put X amount of points in Y skill to get the better skill, otherwise you are weak. Than, you go to the next skill opened up, so on and so forth. You get a choice but you are also forced in the amount of points. If you throw them where ever, than you have completely gimped yourself. Diablo III allows for more freedom for the skills for one good reason. You are not limited to having X skill to use Y. If you want to use X skill and you are that level, go right ahead. You can mix and swap the skills all you want without being tied down by a very linear system. Right in the beginning, and I mean within the first few levels. The Diablo II game has more freedom in terms of skills. But, the more you level, the more freedom you have, the more skills, and less restraint you have. The last point I want to make is in regards to the player amount. There are three portions I wish to address. The first is simple, why does it matter how many friends you have that want to play? I can say I X amount of friends, so it should be increased. The two main reasons is this; the animation of the skills will kill the game. I do not know how much of the game you have seen, but with 4 players alone (and especially with the later skills), the screen is nearly covered with skills. If we had 8 players (as an example), you would not even be able to see what you were attacking. The last point is simply party mechanics. Blizzard really wishes for emphasis to be with parties. Diablo II was a near failure when it came to parties. Most common games you see that had 8 players were Dueling rooms, trading rooms, and Mf runs. The games when people were actually trying to play, the players were either split up or doing entirely different things. There was no need for the players to be together. Even Mf runs were done so for the sake of getting the sweet 8 number, and not the necessity of needing 8 people for dps. Diablo III, because it has less players. There is more emphasis on you the player. Having one person slag behind can be bad, especially with bosses. There is more consequence for not putting in the effort. Especially since the difficulty is easier to balance with the amount of players when there is a maximum of 4. It is easier to make the difficult of the game based on the number of players when there are less to begin with. Anyway yeah, I disagree with your points. The changes have been made to keep the end game content more entertaining and not relying on mechanics that punish you for dumb mistakes. What ? About the stats part : In Diablo 2 you can build you character in really different ways. As example you can build sorceress with max block, or you can neglect the block and go for more vitality... It's entirely up to the player. The game does not force you do one or the other. In Diablo 3 there is no such thing... The game raises your stats instead of you just like in WoW. The skills: This is the same as the stats. You can build your character in many different ways -> Hammerdin, Charger, Zealot, Smiter - these are just 4 of the many variations of the paladin. The player can use his creativity and can mix some of the skills to create hybrid etc. etc. In Diablo 3 there is no such thing again. All players get all the skills, no thinking involved. I played the beta yesterday, and as a long time D2 player I'm pretty disappointed. What makes my character different from the others when the stats system is automated and all the players take the same skills ? Maybe only the items system can bring some diversity, but I'm not sure if it will cut it. I agree. The argument of cookie cutter specs and having a correct way to spec, as the person you're responding to claimed, is not valid for Diablo games. In Diablo 2, there were a large variety of creative ways to spec your character, some were not optimal, but many of them more than viable and it's very fun to be able to build your character the way you want and experiment with different builds. However, as a WoW player, I understand completely why WoW gives you the same core sets of abilities with the exception of spec spells and talents, and why this model is optimal for WoW. WoW is a very competitive game, where players min-max everything for progression raiding and PvP. Therefore, the D2 system will not work, as everyone will just copy the best build and go with it (in fact this is why their changing the talent system in MOP, which I support). Being min-maxed to be absolutely optimal is a part of the competitive nature of WoW. But Diablo is not this type of game, it's not as competitive as WoW. There isn't a fixation on damage meters like WoW. This is because it's nowhere near as hard as WoW at the high-end. Diablo 2 gives players many systems of customizations and a lot of freedom to build your character the way you want, and this is how Diablo 3 should have been. WoW has a excellent spell system. But Diablo 3 isn't WoW, and copying this system is a waste of potential and needlessly constraints player creativity and choice. But I really don't see what's so different about diablo 2 and diablo3 in terms of variety. D2, you have a handful of solid cookie cutter builds, but you could use underused skills and make them work. D3, you will probably also have a handful of solid cookie cutter skill setups, but you will be able to use underused skill + rune combos and make them work. The only real differences are 1. D3 doesn't require you to click multiple times on a skill icon to get there 2. If in D3 your build turns out to be completely unviable (or you just plain don't like playing it), you can change your skill/rune setup instead of having to re-roll a new char I mean, they could change D3 so instead of having to choose which skills/runes you use, you could hotkey any of them but they start at level 1 (where they're worthless) and you're given skill points that you have to allocate in order to make them usable. Then let you respec your skill points in town. The end result would be exactly the same (albeit with a LOT more clicking), but it wouldn't be any better as a game for it. You can't do anything crazy or unique, and then optimize for your crazy idea. There's no equivalent to a sorc with maxed charged bolts, or throwing barb, etc. You just choose fill exactly 6 spells and runes, further restricted to 2 click spells, and 1 spell for each of some 4 roles, depending on your class.
I just feel the need to point out that you don't only get one skill per each of the 4 roles.
If you turn on elective mode you get 6 hotkeys to put ANY skills you have on. You could use every so called "defensive" ability if you wanted to.
I think a lot of people aren't factoring in elective mode when trying to make up builds.
|
Why are there only 4 slots? Why not 8 or something. Why this limitation to 4?
|
On April 22 2012 04:57 [Crimson]Bason wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 04:05 Dandy_Moustachu wrote:On April 22 2012 02:46 [Crimson]Bason wrote:
exactly.... the skill system in D3 seems to provide with possibilities... but in reality it doesnt... the only determining factor that distinguishes you from someone else is equipments. there are no more strategies, tweeking, finding that optimal build or having your own unique build that may not be optimal but works ... being unique is crucial or else it gets dull. D3 doesnt allow that What distinguishes a player from another are the 6 skills you choose : there is your build, those 6 skills (and the 3 passives) as I said thats only one level of complexity ... 1 less than D2... D2 you could have 10-12 hotkeys... now its down to 6 and no switching skills in combat. D2 had that level plus stat and skill point attribution.
I don't remember using more than 6 skills in D2 (but I wasn't the ultimate D2 player by far, and i never play any pvp where I think you had to use more skills) but I can understand that bother you.
I was just answering to people who says that there is no personnalisation since every character have all the skills.
On April 22 2012 05:07 Quenchiest wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 02:05 paralleluniverse wrote:On April 22 2012 01:09 dmfg wrote:On April 22 2012 00:37 paralleluniverse wrote:On April 21 2012 21:04 Pr0wler wrote:On April 21 2012 19:42 Nilrem wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 21 2012 11:34 pellejohnson wrote:
The absolutely worst part with D3 is the change to the skill system. Did they really have to dumb it down this much? I mean it feels so wrong not really having any choice leveling up, feels like everything is auto, what skills you get, what stats go up and the runes. What happened to actually tweaking your character using different builds? What happened to the amazing discussions whether this extra point in this skill over that other skill was worth it or not.
No sorry but I can't say I'm too pleased with these changes, also the max players = 4 is terrible considering that I have a group of 5 friends who would love to play together but right now one of us have to skip playing every single session... I sort of disagree. Diablo 2 is a game that gives off the sense of allowing an exuberant amount of freedom. Unfortunately, that freedom is only a mask since the game itself is limiting. Take for example the attributes; you can place the points where ever you want. But for you to get gear needed to be at least descent, you have to put X amount of points into Y. It gave off the illusion of being free but in reality, you are constrained by gear and the general fact that you can easily gimp your hero. Once you put the points in, there is no turning back and down the line (end game content, which is the important content), you will end up deleting the hero and starting over again. Since there is a glimmer of "right" way. The same is for the skill system. It gives off the illusion of being free but you are actually restricted, it is more restrictive and linear than the Diablo III system. The reason for this is simple, you do get to choose three choices; good job. Now, you have to put X amount of points in Y skill to get the better skill, otherwise you are weak. Than, you go to the next skill opened up, so on and so forth. You get a choice but you are also forced in the amount of points. If you throw them where ever, than you have completely gimped yourself. Diablo III allows for more freedom for the skills for one good reason. You are not limited to having X skill to use Y. If you want to use X skill and you are that level, go right ahead. You can mix and swap the skills all you want without being tied down by a very linear system. Right in the beginning, and I mean within the first few levels. The Diablo II game has more freedom in terms of skills. But, the more you level, the more freedom you have, the more skills, and less restraint you have. The last point I want to make is in regards to the player amount. There are three portions I wish to address. The first is simple, why does it matter how many friends you have that want to play? I can say I X amount of friends, so it should be increased. The two main reasons is this; the animation of the skills will kill the game. I do not know how much of the game you have seen, but with 4 players alone (and especially with the later skills), the screen is nearly covered with skills. If we had 8 players (as an example), you would not even be able to see what you were attacking. The last point is simply party mechanics. Blizzard really wishes for emphasis to be with parties. Diablo II was a near failure when it came to parties. Most common games you see that had 8 players were Dueling rooms, trading rooms, and Mf runs. The games when people were actually trying to play, the players were either split up or doing entirely different things. There was no need for the players to be together. Even Mf runs were done so for the sake of getting the sweet 8 number, and not the necessity of needing 8 people for dps. Diablo III, because it has less players. There is more emphasis on you the player. Having one person slag behind can be bad, especially with bosses. There is more consequence for not putting in the effort. Especially since the difficulty is easier to balance with the amount of players when there is a maximum of 4. It is easier to make the difficult of the game based on the number of players when there are less to begin with. Anyway yeah, I disagree with your points. The changes have been made to keep the end game content more entertaining and not relying on mechanics that punish you for dumb mistakes. What ? About the stats part : In Diablo 2 you can build you character in really different ways. As example you can build sorceress with max block, or you can neglect the block and go for more vitality... It's entirely up to the player. The game does not force you do one or the other. In Diablo 3 there is no such thing... The game raises your stats instead of you just like in WoW. The skills: This is the same as the stats. You can build your character in many different ways -> Hammerdin, Charger, Zealot, Smiter - these are just 4 of the many variations of the paladin. The player can use his creativity and can mix some of the skills to create hybrid etc. etc. In Diablo 3 there is no such thing again. All players get all the skills, no thinking involved. I played the beta yesterday, and as a long time D2 player I'm pretty disappointed. What makes my character different from the others when the stats system is automated and all the players take the same skills ? Maybe only the items system can bring some diversity, but I'm not sure if it will cut it. I agree. The argument of cookie cutter specs and having a correct way to spec, as the person you're responding to claimed, is not valid for Diablo games. In Diablo 2, there were a large variety of creative ways to spec your character, some were not optimal, but many of them more than viable and it's very fun to be able to build your character the way you want and experiment with different builds. However, as a WoW player, I understand completely why WoW gives you the same core sets of abilities with the exception of spec spells and talents, and why this model is optimal for WoW. WoW is a very competitive game, where players min-max everything for progression raiding and PvP. Therefore, the D2 system will not work, as everyone will just copy the best build and go with it (in fact this is why their changing the talent system in MOP, which I support). Being min-maxed to be absolutely optimal is a part of the competitive nature of WoW. But Diablo is not this type of game, it's not as competitive as WoW. There isn't a fixation on damage meters like WoW. This is because it's nowhere near as hard as WoW at the high-end. Diablo 2 gives players many systems of customizations and a lot of freedom to build your character the way you want, and this is how Diablo 3 should have been. WoW has a excellent spell system. But Diablo 3 isn't WoW, and copying this system is a waste of potential and needlessly constraints player creativity and choice. But I really don't see what's so different about diablo 2 and diablo3 in terms of variety. D2, you have a handful of solid cookie cutter builds, but you could use underused skills and make them work. D3, you will probably also have a handful of solid cookie cutter skill setups, but you will be able to use underused skill + rune combos and make them work. The only real differences are 1. D3 doesn't require you to click multiple times on a skill icon to get there 2. If in D3 your build turns out to be completely unviable (or you just plain don't like playing it), you can change your skill/rune setup instead of having to re-roll a new char I mean, they could change D3 so instead of having to choose which skills/runes you use, you could hotkey any of them but they start at level 1 (where they're worthless) and you're given skill points that you have to allocate in order to make them usable. Then let you respec your skill points in town. The end result would be exactly the same (albeit with a LOT more clicking), but it wouldn't be any better as a game for it. You can't do anything crazy or unique, and then optimize for your crazy idea. There's no equivalent to a sorc with maxed charged bolts, or throwing barb, etc. You just choose fill exactly 6 spells and runes, further restricted to 2 click spells, and 1 spell for each of some 4 roles, depending on your class. I just feel the need to point out that you don't only get one skill per each of the 4 roles. If you turn on elective mode you get 6 hotkeys to put ANY skills you have on. You could use every so called "defensive" ability if you wanted to. I think a lot of people aren't factoring in elective mode when trying to make up builds.
I like the D3 system a lot more than the D2's one, but the skill UI and the Elective mode are pretty badly made IMO (they should at least put a button directly in the skill UI instead of the box lost in the menu)
|
On April 22 2012 05:22 Dandy_Moustachu wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 04:57 [Crimson]Bason wrote:On April 22 2012 04:05 Dandy_Moustachu wrote:On April 22 2012 02:46 [Crimson]Bason wrote:
exactly.... the skill system in D3 seems to provide with possibilities... but in reality it doesnt... the only determining factor that distinguishes you from someone else is equipments. there are no more strategies, tweeking, finding that optimal build or having your own unique build that may not be optimal but works ... being unique is crucial or else it gets dull. D3 doesnt allow that What distinguishes a player from another are the 6 skills you choose : there is your build, those 6 skills (and the 3 passives) as I said thats only one level of complexity ... 1 less than D2... D2 you could have 10-12 hotkeys... now its down to 6 and no switching skills in combat. D2 had that level plus stat and skill point attribution. I don't remember using more than 6 skills in D2 (but I wasn't the ultimate D2 player by far, and i never play any pvp where I think you had to use more skills) but I can understand that bother you. I was just answering to people who says that there is no personnalisation since every character have all the skills. Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 05:07 Quenchiest wrote:On April 22 2012 02:05 paralleluniverse wrote:On April 22 2012 01:09 dmfg wrote:On April 22 2012 00:37 paralleluniverse wrote:On April 21 2012 21:04 Pr0wler wrote:On April 21 2012 19:42 Nilrem wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 21 2012 11:34 pellejohnson wrote:
The absolutely worst part with D3 is the change to the skill system. Did they really have to dumb it down this much? I mean it feels so wrong not really having any choice leveling up, feels like everything is auto, what skills you get, what stats go up and the runes. What happened to actually tweaking your character using different builds? What happened to the amazing discussions whether this extra point in this skill over that other skill was worth it or not.
No sorry but I can't say I'm too pleased with these changes, also the max players = 4 is terrible considering that I have a group of 5 friends who would love to play together but right now one of us have to skip playing every single session... I sort of disagree. Diablo 2 is a game that gives off the sense of allowing an exuberant amount of freedom. Unfortunately, that freedom is only a mask since the game itself is limiting. Take for example the attributes; you can place the points where ever you want. But for you to get gear needed to be at least descent, you have to put X amount of points into Y. It gave off the illusion of being free but in reality, you are constrained by gear and the general fact that you can easily gimp your hero. Once you put the points in, there is no turning back and down the line (end game content, which is the important content), you will end up deleting the hero and starting over again. Since there is a glimmer of "right" way. The same is for the skill system. It gives off the illusion of being free but you are actually restricted, it is more restrictive and linear than the Diablo III system. The reason for this is simple, you do get to choose three choices; good job. Now, you have to put X amount of points in Y skill to get the better skill, otherwise you are weak. Than, you go to the next skill opened up, so on and so forth. You get a choice but you are also forced in the amount of points. If you throw them where ever, than you have completely gimped yourself. Diablo III allows for more freedom for the skills for one good reason. You are not limited to having X skill to use Y. If you want to use X skill and you are that level, go right ahead. You can mix and swap the skills all you want without being tied down by a very linear system. Right in the beginning, and I mean within the first few levels. The Diablo II game has more freedom in terms of skills. But, the more you level, the more freedom you have, the more skills, and less restraint you have. The last point I want to make is in regards to the player amount. There are three portions I wish to address. The first is simple, why does it matter how many friends you have that want to play? I can say I X amount of friends, so it should be increased. The two main reasons is this; the animation of the skills will kill the game. I do not know how much of the game you have seen, but with 4 players alone (and especially with the later skills), the screen is nearly covered with skills. If we had 8 players (as an example), you would not even be able to see what you were attacking. The last point is simply party mechanics. Blizzard really wishes for emphasis to be with parties. Diablo II was a near failure when it came to parties. Most common games you see that had 8 players were Dueling rooms, trading rooms, and Mf runs. The games when people were actually trying to play, the players were either split up or doing entirely different things. There was no need for the players to be together. Even Mf runs were done so for the sake of getting the sweet 8 number, and not the necessity of needing 8 people for dps. Diablo III, because it has less players. There is more emphasis on you the player. Having one person slag behind can be bad, especially with bosses. There is more consequence for not putting in the effort. Especially since the difficulty is easier to balance with the amount of players when there is a maximum of 4. It is easier to make the difficult of the game based on the number of players when there are less to begin with. Anyway yeah, I disagree with your points. The changes have been made to keep the end game content more entertaining and not relying on mechanics that punish you for dumb mistakes. What ? About the stats part : In Diablo 2 you can build you character in really different ways. As example you can build sorceress with max block, or you can neglect the block and go for more vitality... It's entirely up to the player. The game does not force you do one or the other. In Diablo 3 there is no such thing... The game raises your stats instead of you just like in WoW. The skills: This is the same as the stats. You can build your character in many different ways -> Hammerdin, Charger, Zealot, Smiter - these are just 4 of the many variations of the paladin. The player can use his creativity and can mix some of the skills to create hybrid etc. etc. In Diablo 3 there is no such thing again. All players get all the skills, no thinking involved. I played the beta yesterday, and as a long time D2 player I'm pretty disappointed. What makes my character different from the others when the stats system is automated and all the players take the same skills ? Maybe only the items system can bring some diversity, but I'm not sure if it will cut it. I agree. The argument of cookie cutter specs and having a correct way to spec, as the person you're responding to claimed, is not valid for Diablo games. In Diablo 2, there were a large variety of creative ways to spec your character, some were not optimal, but many of them more than viable and it's very fun to be able to build your character the way you want and experiment with different builds. However, as a WoW player, I understand completely why WoW gives you the same core sets of abilities with the exception of spec spells and talents, and why this model is optimal for WoW. WoW is a very competitive game, where players min-max everything for progression raiding and PvP. Therefore, the D2 system will not work, as everyone will just copy the best build and go with it (in fact this is why their changing the talent system in MOP, which I support). Being min-maxed to be absolutely optimal is a part of the competitive nature of WoW. But Diablo is not this type of game, it's not as competitive as WoW. There isn't a fixation on damage meters like WoW. This is because it's nowhere near as hard as WoW at the high-end. Diablo 2 gives players many systems of customizations and a lot of freedom to build your character the way you want, and this is how Diablo 3 should have been. WoW has a excellent spell system. But Diablo 3 isn't WoW, and copying this system is a waste of potential and needlessly constraints player creativity and choice. But I really don't see what's so different about diablo 2 and diablo3 in terms of variety. D2, you have a handful of solid cookie cutter builds, but you could use underused skills and make them work. D3, you will probably also have a handful of solid cookie cutter skill setups, but you will be able to use underused skill + rune combos and make them work. The only real differences are 1. D3 doesn't require you to click multiple times on a skill icon to get there 2. If in D3 your build turns out to be completely unviable (or you just plain don't like playing it), you can change your skill/rune setup instead of having to re-roll a new char I mean, they could change D3 so instead of having to choose which skills/runes you use, you could hotkey any of them but they start at level 1 (where they're worthless) and you're given skill points that you have to allocate in order to make them usable. Then let you respec your skill points in town. The end result would be exactly the same (albeit with a LOT more clicking), but it wouldn't be any better as a game for it. You can't do anything crazy or unique, and then optimize for your crazy idea. There's no equivalent to a sorc with maxed charged bolts, or throwing barb, etc. You just choose fill exactly 6 spells and runes, further restricted to 2 click spells, and 1 spell for each of some 4 roles, depending on your class. I just feel the need to point out that you don't only get one skill per each of the 4 roles. If you turn on elective mode you get 6 hotkeys to put ANY skills you have on. You could use every so called "defensive" ability if you wanted to. I think a lot of people aren't factoring in elective mode when trying to make up builds. I like the D3 system a lot more than the D2's one, but the skill UI and the Elective mode are pretty badly made IMO (they should at least put a button directly in the skill UI instead of the box lost in the menu)
With casters or paladins i often used to have more spells than slots in diablo 2.
We haven't seen the endgame yet so we can't really judge for sure but he Skillsystem and no attribute distribution seems really weak in my opinion. The more complex the skillsystem the better the game in my opinion. It just has to make sense. 400 useless synergizing skills with minimal effects is not what i mean but in general i always prefered rpgs where you would have to figure out a lot of the builds.
|
On April 22 2012 05:19 solidbebe wrote:
Why are there only 4 slots? Why not 8 or something. Why this limitation to 4?
Because every skill you get, is always at its max effectiveness when you used it. Having access to more skills would make you more powerful than intended.
It's the exact same reason you only got 1 point per level in Diablo 2. You may as well ask "Why are there only 102 skill points? Why not 200 or something. Why this limitation to 102?".
|
Im with dmfg here. I think everyone that is saying that stat or skill point distribution added meaningful changes to gameplay is totally wrong.
Limiting how many skills you can use is exactly what ended up happening in D2 anyway, the method is just different (arbitrary max bindable skills VS limited by how many skills you could max out).
4+2 in D3 seems about the same as the 6 useful skills you ended up with in D2. If anything it's more.
|
The lienarity point I was trying to make is this; In Diablo II, if you wanted to even get Orb to begin with. You have to get the prerequisite skills. Even if you are not going to use them, you were required to do so. It is the same with any of the skills, unless you were going to max out the very first skill before branching out, which was considerably an hindrance, you were required to get X.
Diablo III on the other hand, the prerequisite are the levels. You get the level, you can use the skill. Diablo II required you to at least be level X before getting a skill. The only difference here is that, you are not limited with the skill tree. You can use any of the skills given, swap the runes, and have your own build on the fly. It even allows you to work with friends and they could try it out as well. Where as in Diablo II, if a friend wanted to try your build out. Well, they had to start a new hero out, level up, and than try it.
In Diablo III, you will have a ton of builds and unique builds you can try out. The main difference is that, you do not have to level up a new hero each and every time you wish to do so.
Need to keep this in mind as well. Unlike the previous games, Diablo III will also have a dedicated PvP system implemented for end game content. Because the amount of heroes you can make are 10 (meaning you can make 5 softcore, and 5 hardcore). You will now have the ability to use your hero for both PvE and PvP while swapping skills and gear. While in Diablo II, there were the PvP builds and PvE, but you need to make a new hero for each since there were cookie cutter builds and without them, you tend to just get walked all over. That is the case for both skill and attributes; this game lacks the permanence factor which punishes you for doing X wrong. But with Diablo III, you get punished, but can learn from the mistakes and try something new.
Minor mistype Edit.
|
On April 22 2012 06:26 Nilrem wrote:
Because the amount of heroes you can make are 10 (meaning you can make 10 softcore, and 10 hardcore). You will now have the ability to use your hero for both PvE and PvP while swapping skills and gear.[
That's not correct. The maximum character slots is ten which means you can have five hardcore and five normal, nine hardcore and one normal, or any combination of ten.
|
On April 22 2012 06:32 skyR wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 06:26 Nilrem wrote:
Because the amount of heroes you can make are 10 (meaning you can make 10 softcore, and 10 hardcore). You will now have the ability to use your hero for both PvE and PvP while swapping skills and gear.[ That's not correct. The maximum character slots is ten which means you can have five hardcore and five normal, nine hardcore and one normal, or any combination of ten.
Oops, thats what I meant. Typing on too many forums at once haha.
|
Oh god why did they have to make the game THAT easy at the beginning?
It is impossible to die, and you dont need any skills except for left click. It was so tedious to click through this without falling asleep.
They would just have to change some numbers and the game would be really good, I dont get it.
|
On April 22 2012 05:27 dmfg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 05:19 solidbebe wrote:
Why are there only 4 slots? Why not 8 or something. Why this limitation to 4? Because every skill you get, is always at its max effectiveness when you used it. Having access to more skills would make you more powerful than intended. It's the exact same reason you only got 1 point per level in Diablo 2. You may as well ask "Why are there only 102 skill points? Why not 200 or something. Why this limitation to 102?".
I don't think it's a valid point at all. While in Diablo 2, you could spend the 102 points to just 4-5 skills, and could have 1-2 strong core skills with a few 1 pointers like teleport, or (sub-optimally, but you could if you wanted) to put points to as many active skills as you wanted. But in Diablo 3, you are limited to just a few. Why? Consoles.
|
Sorry for all the bad thoughts I've been having about you Blizzard, cuz I'm in! I'm in! I'm in!!!!!!!!!!!
|
On April 22 2012 07:12 valaki wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 05:27 dmfg wrote:On April 22 2012 05:19 solidbebe wrote:
Why are there only 4 slots? Why not 8 or something. Why this limitation to 4? Because every skill you get, is always at its max effectiveness when you used it. Having access to more skills would make you more powerful than intended. It's the exact same reason you only got 1 point per level in Diablo 2. You may as well ask "Why are there only 102 skill points? Why not 200 or something. Why this limitation to 102?". I don't think it's a valid point at all. While in Diablo 2, you could spend the 102 points to just 4-5 skills, and could have 1-2 strong core skills with a few 1 pointers like teleport, or (sub-optimally, but you could if you wanted) to put points to as many active skills as you wanted. But in Diablo 3, you are limited to just a few. Why? Consoles.
Le Sigh... the active list is limited because you get to have ALL the skills. Where as in Diablo II, you were limited in what you could get. They are also trying to avoid having it like WoW where you have an entire 1-0 bar filled with skills. I really hate the whole console point because it is such a lame reason. It is equivalent to answering a question with, "just because".
|
On April 22 2012 07:08 Redox wrote:
Oh god why did they have to make the game THAT easy at the beginning?
It is impossible to die, and you dont need any skills except for left click. It was so tedious to click through this without falling asleep.
They would just have to change some numbers and the game would be really good, I dont get it.
Read the thread, you'll know exactly why. If you happened to miss the last X pages of discussion on the topic, I will reiterate: Because act 1 on Normal mode is easy. You heard me. The game is that easy in the beginning because act 1 on Normal mode is just that; easy.
|
On April 22 2012 07:45 Puph wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 07:08 Redox wrote:
Oh god why did they have to make the game THAT easy at the beginning?
It is impossible to die, and you dont need any skills except for left click. It was so tedious to click through this without falling asleep.
They would just have to change some numbers and the game would be really good, I dont get it. Read the thread, you'll know exactly why. If you happened to miss the last X pages of discussion on the topic, I will reiterate: Because act 1 on Normal mode is easy. You heard me. The game is that easy in the beginning because act 1 on Normal mode is just that; easy.
I know that is easy, that was exactly my point.
My question was why. Seems so pointless.
And it is all fine that it might become better later. But why do I have to spend hours with mindless leftklicking to reach the "real" game at some point?
Thats worse than the 30 minutes of ads before the movie in cinema. That does at least not take THAT long and I can skip it by comming later. I see no way to skip this.
|
On April 22 2012 07:12 valaki wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 05:27 dmfg wrote:On April 22 2012 05:19 solidbebe wrote:
Why are there only 4 slots? Why not 8 or something. Why this limitation to 4? Because every skill you get, is always at its max effectiveness when you used it. Having access to more skills would make you more powerful than intended. It's the exact same reason you only got 1 point per level in Diablo 2. You may as well ask "Why are there only 102 skill points? Why not 200 or something. Why this limitation to 102?". I don't think it's a valid point at all. While in Diablo 2, you could spend the 102 points to just 4-5 skills, and could have 1-2 strong core skills with a few 1 pointers like teleport, or (sub-optimally, but you could if you wanted) to put points to as many active skills as you wanted. But in Diablo 3, you are limited to just a few. Why? Consoles.
They're balancing the game around you having 6 optimal skills. They want to balance hell and inferno to be a challenge, even for the seasoned hardcore gamers of today.
There is no way to do that without making it impossible for sub-optimal builds. If they followed a D2 path and allowed these suboptimal builds (which are only done either by first time players who have no idea what they're doing, or enthusiasts wanting a challenge), everybody might as well just delete their character at the end of normal because it probably ain't even going to be able to reach hell, never mind be viable for inferno.
I have no idea what consoles have to do with any of this, because the case for the skill/rune model stands up for itself.
If you still want a challenge, then bear in mind Blizzard have said they expect that people will HAVE to use a mixture of offensive and defensive abilities to make it through nightmare and above. Then here's your chance to show them how unique and awesome you are, by going pure offence. Use the high DPS runes and make up for lower survivability with better play. Work out which skills you can take and how you can use them to mitigate the fragility of your character.
But don't blame what is fundamentally a better game design, that lets players demonstrate their superiority through skill and gameplay instead of character builds.
|
On April 22 2012 07:56 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 07:45 Puph wrote:On April 22 2012 07:08 Redox wrote:
Oh god why did they have to make the game THAT easy at the beginning?
It is impossible to die, and you dont need any skills except for left click. It was so tedious to click through this without falling asleep.
They would just have to change some numbers and the game would be really good, I dont get it. Read the thread, you'll know exactly why. If you happened to miss the last X pages of discussion on the topic, I will reiterate: Because act 1 on Normal mode is easy. You heard me. The game is that easy in the beginning because act 1 on Normal mode is just that; easy. I know that is easy, that was exactly my point. My question was why. Seems so pointless. And it is all fine that it might become better later. But why do I have to spend hours with mindless leftklicking to reach the "real" game at some point? Thats worse than the 30 minutes of ads before the movie in cinema. That does at least not take THAT long and I can skip it by comming later. I see no way to skip this.
You must be trolling right? lol.
Why do I have to level in WoW? Why do I have to play the early game in Starcraft II? Why do I have to play the early game of DotA? Why do I have to go to school? Why do I need training? Shit is so easy man.
|
On April 22 2012 07:56 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 07:45 Puph wrote:On April 22 2012 07:08 Redox wrote:
Oh god why did they have to make the game THAT easy at the beginning?
It is impossible to die, and you dont need any skills except for left click. It was so tedious to click through this without falling asleep.
They would just have to change some numbers and the game would be really good, I dont get it. Read the thread, you'll know exactly why. If you happened to miss the last X pages of discussion on the topic, I will reiterate: Because act 1 on Normal mode is easy. You heard me. The game is that easy in the beginning because act 1 on Normal mode is just that; easy. I know that is easy, that was exactly my point. My question was why. Seems so pointless. And it is all fine that it might become better later. But why do I have to spend hours with mindless leftklicking to reach the "real" game at some point? Thats worse than the 30 minutes of ads before the movie in cinema. That does at least not take THAT long and I can skip it by comming later. I see no way to skip this.
Because not everyone is familiar with diablo style controls, and dying repeatedly in the tutorial while you're trying to get the hang of how to move/attack/experiment with new skills and runes, is really annoying?
There's a reason games start easy and get challenging later. It's because dying to a hard monster you need to figure out how to beat, with tools you understand, can make for fun gameplay. Dying because you're 5 minutes into a game where you have no idea wtf you are doing, is not fun.
|
On April 22 2012 07:56 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2012 07:45 Puph wrote:On April 22 2012 07:08 Redox wrote:
Oh god why did they have to make the game THAT easy at the beginning?
It is impossible to die, and you dont need any skills except for left click. It was so tedious to click through this without falling asleep.
They would just have to change some numbers and the game would be really good, I dont get it. Read the thread, you'll know exactly why. If you happened to miss the last X pages of discussion on the topic, I will reiterate: Because act 1 on Normal mode is easy. You heard me. The game is that easy in the beginning because act 1 on Normal mode is just that; easy. I know that is easy, that was exactly my point. My question was why. Seems so pointless. And it is all fine that it might become better later. But why do I have to spend hours with mindless leftklicking to reach the "real" game at some point? Thats worse than the 30 minutes of ads before the movie in cinema. That does at least not take THAT long and I can skip it by comming later. I see no way to skip this.
Because beginnings of games are meant to be easy? Part 1 of chapter 1 is essentially the tutorial.
|
You should play normal for the story tbh, its not meant to be a challenge for a TL average player.
Think of it as the easy mode of every other game, the only difference with Diablo is that you have to do the difficulties in order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
