|
On August 03 2023 10:02 Turbovolver wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2023 03:31 WombaT wrote:
Or, why are they mad? Is this patch that heinous? Genuinely asking as I had some fun playing on my bro’s acc but still want to get myself a copy This may not be the most charitable framing, but as I understand it, people are mad because Blizzard slowed down the game a lot, and yet the audience they attracted and catered to with their game were the sort who want to plow through content with their brain off. All the complaints are about the game slowing down, levelling taking longer, longer to exit a dungeon, classes being nerfed... Some of these may have been good balancing decisions (others like the leaving a dungeon thing really do feel like they were just trying to sneak in some free points to bolster their metrics of user-minutes to impress the higher-ups), but that doesn't matter because game slower now want level go up faster.
They explained their thought process behind every buff/nerf (kiss-curse: trading certain nerfs for other buffs) and other patch change, including the dungeon-exit slowdown (they said that too many people were escaping boss fights without penalty, and a dungeon-exit slowdown was one way to force a little more planning and thought before yolo-ing into a boss fight because it'd be harder to escape mid-combat, but then they realized it wasn't going to effectively fix that issue so they're reverting it back to the original dungeon-exit pace).
They're also resetting dungeons faster, adding more rewards for nightmare dungeons, increasing monster density, and polishing the horse-riding situation, all of which speed up the playing and leveling-up process. People just seem to be angry that the game wasn't released with this level of perfect foresight, and that patching improvements was necessary in the first place.
|
On August 03 2023 10:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:They're also resetting dungeons faster, adding more rewards for nightmare dungeons, increasing monster density, and polishing the horse-riding situation, all of which speed up the playing and leveling-up process. People just seem to be angry that the game wasn't released with this level of perfect foresight, and that patching improvements was necessary in the first place.
No, I think this totally misses the point.
The modern gamer is conditioned to expect mediocrity on release that will later be fixed. It's not an issue of the game not coming out near-perfect on release. The people that would complain about that are the old-schoolers who grew up when gaming was different, an older crowd many of whom won't even be playing Diablo4 (hi) and who we would hope tend to be a little more mature and not liable to engage in things like review bombing.
The problem is these modern gamers who pre-order because of promises and would rather buy a game on marketing and brand value and then yell at the company to make it how they want instead of actually buying the games they want.
(EDIT: Or likely, they don't know what they want.)
As soon as they get a whiff of evidence that things won't be fixed how they want, they get mad. Or only a small subset of them gets mad, but it's a big enough subset to be noticeable when you target the huge mass of gamers falling into this demographic. When Blizzard made a bunch of changes that slowed the game down, or were at least perceived to do such, it caused the latest trashfire among that crowd.
And while it is absolutely a toxic culture, it is a toxic culture that the big studios have actively fed by pushing everything towards pre-orders and releasing games in unfinished states (a symptom of pre-order culture) and making everything a live service to improve their bottom lines.
|
On August 03 2023 10:36 Turbovolver wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2023 10:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:They're also resetting dungeons faster, adding more rewards for nightmare dungeons, increasing monster density, and polishing the horse-riding situation, all of which speed up the playing and leveling-up process. People just seem to be angry that the game wasn't released with this level of perfect foresight, and that patching improvements was necessary in the first place. No, I think this totally misses the point. The modern gamer is conditioned to expect mediocrity on release that will later be fixed. It's not an issue of the game not coming out near-perfect on release. The people that would complain about that are the old-schoolers who grew up when gaming was different, an older crowd many of whom won't even be playing Diablo4 (hi) and who we would hope tend to be a little more mature and not liable to engage in things like review bombing.
Why do you think this? I think plenty of video games now (as well as "back in the day", before patches existed) are released in great condition, rather than being released as half-finished, mediocre games that require patches to be finished. Games having patches and updates doesn't mean that the game was originally mediocre. Even if someone thinks that Diablo 4 had a mediocre release, there are way more games out there to look at.
|
To be clear, I think D4 released in decent shape as far as the industry and releasing unfinished games goes. I would argue its issues run far deeper than bugs or a lack of polish, but of course that's just my take on the game and plenty of others have enjoyed it. As for bugs though, it does sound like the D4 codebase is held together by sticky tape, considering they had to zoom in the camera so far because of performance issues and are unable to increase stash space because everyone loads everyone's stash. So that's either a sign of at least a bit of rushing or poor coding (or both!).
And to your broader point, I do think you were right that I was a bit too doomer. Being here on teamliquid, my field of view is a bit Blizzard-centric, so I think of things like Overwatch 2 or WC3 reforged as good examples of games sold on unfulfilled promises, released unfinished but "we'll totally work on them still! (if they are profitable)". But there's also good examples outside of that such as Redfall and the Gollum game as recent examples, or Cyberpunk as the super-obvious, classic case of "game forced to release unfinished because of angry gamers but the gamers wouldn't be angry if you hadn't sold them all pre-orders and given them release dates". I feel there are more examples I may have forgotten (and well, every live service game kind of releases with an implicit "we'll fix what we need to" promise in the background), but I do take your point.
I would still argue that the crowd angry with D4 are not angry because it released in a state needing a few patches, however. Lots of other games have had a few big patches and not kicked up this much stink - this is certainly about the direction (or perceived direction) of the patch.
|
On August 03 2023 11:43 Turbovolver wrote:
To be clear, I think D4 released in decent shape as far as the industry and releasing unfinished games goes. I would argue its issues run far deeper than bugs or a lack of polish, but of course that's just my take on the game and plenty of others have enjoyed it. As for bugs though, it does sound like the D4 codebase is held together by sticky tape, considering they had to zoom in the camera so far because of performance issues and are unable to increase stash space because everyone loads everyone's stash. So that's either a sign of at least a bit of rushing or poor coding (or both!).
And to your broader point, I do think you were right that I was a bit too doomer. Being here on teamliquid, my field of view is a bit Blizzard-centric, so I think of things like Overwatch 2 or WC3 reforged as good examples of games sold on unfulfilled promises, released unfinished but "we'll totally work on them still! (if they are profitable)". But there's also good examples outside of that such as Redfall and the Gollum game as recent examples, or Cyberpunk as the super-obvious, classic case of "game forced to release unfinished because of angry gamers but the gamers wouldn't be angry if you hadn't sold them all pre-orders and given them release dates". I feel there are more examples I may have forgotten (and well, every live service game kind of releases with an implicit "we'll fix what we need to" promise in the background), but I do take your point.
I would still argue that the crowd angry with D4 are not angry because it released in a state needing a few patches, however. Lots of other games have had a few big patches and not kicked up this much stink - this is certainly about the direction (or perceived direction) of the patch.
Ah, okay. I was including other non-Blizzard PC games and console games as well. And I think D4 got review-bombed from the very beginning, even before the recent patch, before any perceived direction of changes were evident, but I'm sure everyone has their own specific, subjective reasons for their rating of D4 anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
On August 03 2023 12:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2023 11:43 Turbovolver wrote:
To be clear, I think D4 released in decent shape as far as the industry and releasing unfinished games goes. I would argue its issues run far deeper than bugs or a lack of polish, but of course that's just my take on the game and plenty of others have enjoyed it. As for bugs though, it does sound like the D4 codebase is held together by sticky tape, considering they had to zoom in the camera so far because of performance issues and are unable to increase stash space because everyone loads everyone's stash. So that's either a sign of at least a bit of rushing or poor coding (or both!).
And to your broader point, I do think you were right that I was a bit too doomer. Being here on teamliquid, my field of view is a bit Blizzard-centric, so I think of things like Overwatch 2 or WC3 reforged as good examples of games sold on unfulfilled promises, released unfinished but "we'll totally work on them still! (if they are profitable)". But there's also good examples outside of that such as Redfall and the Gollum game as recent examples, or Cyberpunk as the super-obvious, classic case of "game forced to release unfinished because of angry gamers but the gamers wouldn't be angry if you hadn't sold them all pre-orders and given them release dates". I feel there are more examples I may have forgotten (and well, every live service game kind of releases with an implicit "we'll fix what we need to" promise in the background), but I do take your point.
I would still argue that the crowd angry with D4 are not angry because it released in a state needing a few patches, however. Lots of other games have had a few big patches and not kicked up this much stink - this is certainly about the direction (or perceived direction) of the patch. Ah, okay. I was including other non-Blizzard PC games and console games as well. And I think D4 got review-bombed from the very beginning, even before the recent patch, before any perceived direction of changes were evident, but I'm sure everyone has their own specific, subjective reasons for their rating of D4 anyway.
I'm pretty sure D4 had like a 9/10 in the honeymoon period and before the patch
|
On August 03 2023 22:59 sertas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2023 12:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 03 2023 11:43 Turbovolver wrote:
To be clear, I think D4 released in decent shape as far as the industry and releasing unfinished games goes. I would argue its issues run far deeper than bugs or a lack of polish, but of course that's just my take on the game and plenty of others have enjoyed it. As for bugs though, it does sound like the D4 codebase is held together by sticky tape, considering they had to zoom in the camera so far because of performance issues and are unable to increase stash space because everyone loads everyone's stash. So that's either a sign of at least a bit of rushing or poor coding (or both!).
And to your broader point, I do think you were right that I was a bit too doomer. Being here on teamliquid, my field of view is a bit Blizzard-centric, so I think of things like Overwatch 2 or WC3 reforged as good examples of games sold on unfulfilled promises, released unfinished but "we'll totally work on them still! (if they are profitable)". But there's also good examples outside of that such as Redfall and the Gollum game as recent examples, or Cyberpunk as the super-obvious, classic case of "game forced to release unfinished because of angry gamers but the gamers wouldn't be angry if you hadn't sold them all pre-orders and given them release dates". I feel there are more examples I may have forgotten (and well, every live service game kind of releases with an implicit "we'll fix what we need to" promise in the background), but I do take your point.
I would still argue that the crowd angry with D4 are not angry because it released in a state needing a few patches, however. Lots of other games have had a few big patches and not kicked up this much stink - this is certainly about the direction (or perceived direction) of the patch. Ah, okay. I was including other non-Blizzard PC games and console games as well. And I think D4 got review-bombed from the very beginning, even before the recent patch, before any perceived direction of changes were evident, but I'm sure everyone has their own specific, subjective reasons for their rating of D4 anyway. I'm pretty sure D4 had like a 9/10 in the honeymoon period and before the patch
June 10th was 4 days after the game was released, and there were already articles about the players' review bombing, so the review bombing from players - like the 4.8 on Metacritic by June 10th - started pretty much immediately (despite critics/sites praising the game before/during launch): https://gamerant.com/diablo-4-review-bomb-why/
Over the past two months, the 4.8 has decreased further to a 2.2: https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iv
|
I feel like it was released as a very good looking empty shell.
What I find wrong with D4, has a lot to do with what I find wrong with games after innovations from MMORPG and Mobile gaming.
I feel like some stuff in D4 is not even trying to be immersive. Like using terms like "Events", having other players stacking nearby the town portal... Every little detail counts.
About the empty shell. The art and world built is incredible, the music fits. It's always a very subtle equation, you want to player feel progress, feel value in items and have time to have some attachment with some of them, you want them to have meaningful fights...
Right now, I have a necro, and it is one shooting with area damage spell. It takes a main story boss to have something like "play". I don't use potions...
My experience right now feels like "follow the yellow marker". Sometimes, the main quest is so badly designed like Act III. Lothra goes like "I'm hangover, go ask that person", you go to the person, "I know nothing" you go back and it really feel like filler dialog.
|
im not surprised at the amount of "review bombing" d4 received. blizzard spent years developing the game and they tried to be as proactive as possible in receiving feedback throughout the development. an open alpha and an open beta also took place in which they received even more feedback on the game.
i think if blizzard had a stronger vision for their game and they actually didnt involve so many fans and community members as part of the development process, they would have a longer rope. but if youve chosen to include the fanbase in the development process and you go around marketing the point about how much youre trying to implement feedback, you cant be surprised when you release a game that is subpar and seemingly lacking in many areas which there was obviously a lot of criticism and feedback for. d4 should rightfully get poor reviews after release then because they cant demand leniency at that point anymore
|
True Evilfatsh1t, games are an art form, and you don't make great art with average opinion of people.
That's the whole indie vs Pop.
Diablo was indie became pop :D
What do you guys thing about the ubiquitous quest marker? It reminds me of those insects following a laser pointer through a maze.
|
There was a comically large number of red flags prior to the release of the game, but Blizzard shills pushed it hard like it was the second coming of Christ. It's unacceptable that this game could, at best, receive a 7/10 from someone like MrLlamaSC. It should be an easy 8-9/10 for him.
The heavy focus on the "endgame" prior to release is a soulless endeavor, because it takes all the focus away from the development of the first playthrough. Both fans and developers of D4 were constantly worried about endgame satisfaction. I think that was a big mistake. The first playthrough alone should be satisfying enough to warrant the whole purchase. Consecutive playthroughs should be reserved for people who get addicted to the process, and endgame playability should be reserved exclusively for superfans. Blizzard completely failed to consider that.
The first wave of consumers doesn't care about endgame, and rightfully so because replaying the same content over and over gets real dull real quick for most people. Most people want a few dozen hours of fun and then they tend to move on. That means the game has to be at its best during the first hours. D4 completely missed that mark.
|
On August 04 2023 18:18 Magic Powers wrote:
There was a comically large number of red flags prior to the release of the game, but Blizzard shills pushed it hard like it was the second coming of Christ. It's unacceptable that this game could, at best, receive a 7/10 from someone like MrLlamaSC. It should be an easy 8-9/10 for him.
The heavy focus on the "endgame" prior to release is a soulless endeavor, because it takes all the focus away from the development of the first playthrough. Both fans and developers of D4 were constantly worried about endgame satisfaction. I think that was a big mistake. The first playthrough alone should be satisfying enough to warrant the whole purchase. Consecutive playthroughs should be reserved for people who get addicted to the process, and endgame playability should be reserved exclusively for superfans. Blizzard completely failed to consider that.
The first wave of consumers doesn't care about endgame, and rightfully so because replaying the same content over and over gets real dull real quick for most people. Most people want a few dozen hours of fun and then they tend to move on. That means the game has to be at its best during the first hours. D4 completely missed that mark.
I think that's just part of the problem. Another part is what I mentioned previously and that's the fact that they probably didn't have clear direction and didn't know which way to lean for the fans of older/other titles and ended up implementing a bit of everything, making it for no-one in particular. That's why even die hard Diablo fans aren't really interested in the "endgame" they created.
After few hours of playing Season 1 I kinda lost all motivation and instead created a new char in D2R and spent more hours there than in D4 just having fun on a throwaway char that I don't even have any real plans for.
|
Just my two cents but maybe they do have a clear direction that is making a "Diablo-themed" GaaS game instead of a "Diablo-esque" game. This would explain why we see Diablo 4 devs prioritizing all the wrong "Diablo-esque" mechanisms, they are the right Gaas mechanisms, that's why. This tendency seems to be the common pitfall for many RPG-turn-MMO titles.
|
In general I hate fanboy pandering, because you will ultimately end up with a mess that appeals to no one. Make a game with mechanics you believe in that is a successor in the franchise. If it means mechanics overhaul or lore reset or whatever so be it. I have much more respect for studios taking a hard stance over soft spining because easy money finance bullshit.
|
On August 04 2023 19:42 Uldridge wrote:
In general I hate fanboy pandering, because you will ultimately end up with a mess that appeals to no one. Make a game with mechanics you believe in that is a successor in the franchise. If it means mechanics overhaul or lore reset or whatever so be it. I have much more respect for studios taking a hard stance over soft spining because easy money finance bullshit.
I think there's nothing wrong with making a game which panders to the fanboys. After all, giving your core and long time audience what it wants is a good way to retain it (just look at all the games thriving on their existing base, Civilisation, Total War etc.). What I find problematic however is to try and make a game appeal to as many people as possible as it can either become too bland or too disjointed, which ultimately lessens its appeal to every audience.
Doing it like that also makes the game unfocused. After all, if your game's focus is on say storytelling and you do it right people will forgive you if other elements aren't as polished (combat being lacking for example), or if you focus heavily on the action and do it well no one is going to really give you flak for having sub-par story. If you half-ass everything though then players are going to complain about every single aspect of your game.
|
On August 05 2023 11:26 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2023 19:42 Uldridge wrote:
In general I hate fanboy pandering, because you will ultimately end up with a mess that appeals to no one. Make a game with mechanics you believe in that is a successor in the franchise. If it means mechanics overhaul or lore reset or whatever so be it. I have much more respect for studios taking a hard stance over soft spining because easy money finance bullshit. I think there's nothing wrong with making a game which panders to the fanboys. After all, giving your core and long time audience what it wants is a good way to retain it (just look at all the games thriving on their existing base, Civilisation, Total War etc.). What I find problematic however is to try and make a game appeal to as many people as possible as it can either become too bland or too disjointed, which ultimately lessens its appeal to every audience. Doing it like that also makes the game unfocused. After all, if your game's focus is on say storytelling and you do it right people will forgive you if other elements aren't as polished (combat being lacking for example), or if you focus heavily on the action and do it well no one is going to really give you flak for having sub-par story. If you half-ass everything though then players are going to complain about every single aspect of your game.
I think its a pride thing as well. It takes a ton of effort and time to make quality content and if I've seen anything from Poe its that people will not mind a second if you reuse content with almost only a new coat of paint. The biggest problem I think with AAA games is how exponentially labor intensive graphics are vs the things that people actually interact with. I think, especially in ARPG games, if you cut the insane notion of brand new content everywhere and just reuse old bosses and environments with refreshes to people's experience in that content people will be happier.
I think if D4 ripped off just maps from Poe and just ripped off its own bosses from the campaign but with higher stats and slightly different shading people would be a lot happier with the end game. If they were willing to lean on league type content for their endgame and just focus on the campaign being worth the price of admission it would have been a lot better game. Wow has made the focus on endgame content so obsessed with Blizzard that they've forgotten that you need to get people in the door first with a new game. I legitimately don't think Poe is better than D4 its just that poe focuses more on variety than quality and because its a free game it works.
|
|
|
On August 05 2023 12:38 Sermokala wrote:
... I legitimately don't think Poe is better than D4 its just that poe focuses more on variety than quality and because its a free game it works.
In what sense better exactly?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
