|
On April 02 2023 02:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
I'll keep an eye on Last Epoch looks promising aside from again 6 skill limit haha it's on early access so I'll check it again when it launches.
6 skill limit imo doesn't hurt as much in LE because you can customize your skills so much. Obviously there's still a forced choice between different options in LE, but then again so is in D2 with skill points and PoE with gear slots.
It's also been in early access for years and playable for years. They have added online mode recently (was offline only before), so there's that, but essentially this game is somewhere in the vicinity of 85%+ finished, 100% playable and the other 15% are just finetuning and lategame changes.
The main shortcomings are imo in the fairly diffuse story and that it's lacking the big cinematic cutscenes, but gameplay wise it's imo the best ARPG to date.
|
On April 02 2023 06:29 Archeon wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2023 02:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
I'll keep an eye on Last Epoch looks promising aside from again 6 skill limit haha it's on early access so I'll check it again when it launches. 6 skill limit imo doesn't hurt as much in LE because you can customize your skills so much. Obviously there's still a forced choice between different options in LE, but then again so is in D2 with skill points and PoE with gear slots. It's also been in early access for years and playable for years. They have added online mode recently (was offline only before), so there's that, but essentially this game is somewhere in the vicinity of 85%+ finished, 100% playable and the other 15% are just finetuning and lategame changes. The main shortcomings are imo in the fairly diffuse story and that it's lacking the big cinematic cutscenes, but gameplay wise it's imo the best ARPG to date.
Nice. I'm all for making choices for each character of course and that gives a lot of incentive to make extra characters and gives a lot of replayability to a game like this, it's just I really wish to see a return of games in that genre that let you use more skills actively / actions per character (and even let you choose how many).
|
Supposedly D3 has respec tokens that you need earn? I really hope this isn't the path they are choosing to go.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
Assuming you meant D4, how on earth did you arrive at that conclusion based on his tweet lol
Respecing costs gold.
|
On April 02 2023 12:45 BluemoonSC wrote:Assuming you meant D4, how on earth did you arrive at that conclusion based on his tweet lol Respecing costs gold.
others have said D3 has respec tokens that you need to earn whether it is via gold, or a certain amounts of exp I don't know. Either way is is a bad idea. Never mind the fact that the respec of only 1 skill point didn't work during the beta to begin with.
|
d3 respec is completely free
imho its d4 worst design choice to have a cost for respecs its either:
a) so cheap that it doesnt matter in the lategame and only really annoying in the earlygame (where id like to change talents due to itemdrops) just like item rerolling in d3
b) its so expensive that ill simply wont play some builds because lvling a new char everytime i want to try something is just not worth it for me
but its bad design either way, a quick talk with the devs of WOW should show them how well received "meaningful choices" are at the playerbase these days
|
Already said it but I like that respecing has a cost. It doesn't have to either be too cheap or too expensive, it can be any middle ground where you can't respec all the time such as change your spec every time you're doing a different boss or when you're going for pvp instead of pvm [which I think rly sux]. If it's not very expensive and you can completely respec, that would probably mean making more than 1 character of the same class on a given season will never be a good choice. So I'd actually say it would best be quite expensive and you can't completely respec. (more choice on character creation screen)
Picture the game where you can respec anytime for pvp and some build having the highest winrate or perceived so. Instead of having your awesome fantasy pvp battles where you never know what to expect, people come into the pvp zones respecing into a few known pvp builds before switching back to their pvm build after they come out. To me that sounds boring. Same if you're gonna switch your pvm builds depending on encounters etc.
In the end I think you keep your off season chars on a separate realm that's not for the current season. But none of these chars are going to matter if they can all respec into each other when they're the same class.
|
and im sure its been said before, if you don’t like to respec don’t do it,
and yes id like to imagine a game where I can tweek my skills according to my tasks ahead, that sound pretty great actually
and again if its important to you to have 12 chars of the same class, go ahead and make em, im not messing with your way to play the game when i want to respec
|
Make respecs cost a bit so you can't do it constantly, but cheap enough that you can experiment and try out things without having to make a new character is the sweet spot, imo.
|
On April 02 2023 21:39 uummpaa wrote:
d3 respec is completely free
imho its d4 worst design choice to have a cost for respecs its either:
a) so cheap that it doesnt matter in the lategame and only really annoying in the earlygame (where id like to change talents due to itemdrops) just like item rerolling in d3
b) its so expensive that ill simply wont play some builds because lvling a new char everytime i want to try something is just not worth it for me
but its bad design either way, a quick talk with the devs of WOW should show them how well received "meaningful choices" are at the playerbase these days
I generally like low respec costs, but not free respecs, just for the psychology of it. Ultimately they mostly don't matter, but they do make you think a bit about it and consider your specs a bit more relevant than just constant free respecs.
|
On April 02 2023 23:18 uummpaa wrote:
and im sure its been said before, if you don’t like to respec don’t do it,
and yes id like to imagine a game where I can tweek my skills according to my tasks ahead, that sound pretty great actually
and again if its important to you to have 12 chars of the same class, go ahead and make em, im not messing with your way to play the game when i want to respec
Like all multiplayer RPGs what any player can do with their stuff and character affects all the other players and vice versa. RPG cheaters for example would use the same line that you did as an excuse as if getting their loot through cheating doesn't affect you, but it's of course very wrong.
|
On April 02 2023 23:39 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
Like all multiplayer RPGs what any player can do with their stuff and character affects all the other players and vice versa. RPG cheaters for example would use the same line that you did as an excuse as if getting their loot through cheating doesn't affect you, but it's of course very wrong.
ok so i shouldnt be able to respec because of cheaters, great point you got there
you can use that logic against anything, even your reasons for limiting respecs so thats not adding anything
|
On April 02 2023 23:51 uummpaa wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2023 23:39 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
Like all multiplayer RPGs what any player can do with their stuff and character affects all the other players and vice versa. RPG cheaters for example would use the same line that you did as an excuse as if getting their loot through cheating doesn't affect you, but it's of course very wrong. ok so i shouldnt be able to respec because of cheaters, great point you got there you can use that logic against anything, even your reasons for limiting respecs so thats not adding anything
Exactly anything that any player can do affects all the other players in a multiplayer RPG, cause you're playing coop, pvp and trading (even perhaps competing on any kind of leaderboard type of thing atside of these, including speedrunning or any other). That's why while there's pros and cons to any way to design the game, you can't just tell players "if you don't like respecs just don't do it while I can have it". It's like, "if you don't like OP items don't use them". Yeah well the OP items are still going to affect you so you're gonna say you don't like them being there or you'll have to use them or just be disadvantaged etc.
|
On April 03 2023 02:37 ProMeTheus112 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2023 23:51 uummpaa wrote:On April 02 2023 23:39 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
Like all multiplayer RPGs what any player can do with their stuff and character affects all the other players and vice versa. RPG cheaters for example would use the same line that you did as an excuse as if getting their loot through cheating doesn't affect you, but it's of course very wrong. ok so i shouldnt be able to respec because of cheaters, great point you got there you can use that logic against anything, even your reasons for limiting respecs so thats not adding anything Exactly anything that any player can do affects all the other players in a multiplayer RPG, cause you're playing coop, pvp and trading (even perhaps competing on any kind of leaderboard type of thing atside of these, including speedrunning or any other). That's why while there's pros and cons to any way to design the game, you can't just tell players "if you don't like respecs just don't do it while I can have it". It's like, "if you don't like OP items don't use them". Yeah well the OP items are still going to affect you so you're gonna say you don't like them being there or you'll have to use them or just be disadvantaged etc.
It even goes beyond that. There is a clear psychological aspect to it. If something is available for free, not taking it is not a choice that feels rewarding. Imagine you get to chose between two things you really want but the option you didn't chose is available for free later. There isn't any consequence to that choice.
In RPGs, choices for your character don't matter as long as they have consequences - in this case a respec cost or no respec for skill points. I'm in the camp of no respec or very limited respec in ARPGs. If you want to try something new, make a new character. Skill choices are part of the journey. This is one of the main reasons D3 had 0 longevity for me because I felt like the leveling process didn't matter at all. Why would I spend the time to level up when non of the choices have any permanence? What a waste of time. You could just remove levels at that point. It also really shortens the time and fun of the experimentation process for me. In D3, at max level you just equip every skill for a couple minutes and you have seen everything. Experimentation done after 10 minutes.
I also disagree with the notion of bringing up WoW on this matter because it's a very different game. MMOs or other competitive games are very different in what they want from a player. In WoW I would be in favour of freely switching specs and to make it very convenient. The reason being it expects you to PvP, play solo, play in small groups, mid-sized groups, large groups, different forms of content and each needs a different build. Adjustment is vital and part of the game. In ARPGs you have one build for everything anyways, especially nowadays when devs are afraid to put in anything that favours, let alone requires, a certain type of playstyle or build.
|
On April 03 2023 03:10 Miragee wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2023 02:37 ProMeTheus112 wrote:On April 02 2023 23:51 uummpaa wrote:On April 02 2023 23:39 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
Like all multiplayer RPGs what any player can do with their stuff and character affects all the other players and vice versa. RPG cheaters for example would use the same line that you did as an excuse as if getting their loot through cheating doesn't affect you, but it's of course very wrong. ok so i shouldnt be able to respec because of cheaters, great point you got there you can use that logic against anything, even your reasons for limiting respecs so thats not adding anything Exactly anything that any player can do affects all the other players in a multiplayer RPG, cause you're playing coop, pvp and trading (even perhaps competing on any kind of leaderboard type of thing atside of these, including speedrunning or any other). That's why while there's pros and cons to any way to design the game, you can't just tell players "if you don't like respecs just don't do it while I can have it". It's like, "if you don't like OP items don't use them". Yeah well the OP items are still going to affect you so you're gonna say you don't like them being there or you'll have to use them or just be disadvantaged etc. It even goes beyond that. There is a clear psychological aspect to it. If something is available for free, not taking it is not a choice that feels rewarding. Imagine you get to chose between two things you really want but the option you didn't chose is available for free later. There isn't any consequence to that choice. In RPGs, choices for your character don't matter as long as they have consequences - in this case a respec cost or no respec for skill points. I'm in the camp of no respec or very limited respec in ARPGs. If you want to try something new, make a new character. Skill choices are part of the journey. This is one of the main reasons D3 had 0 longevity for me because I felt like the leveling process didn't matter at all. Why would I spend the time to level up when non of the choices have any permanence? What a waste of time. You could just remove levels at that point. It also really shortens the time and fun of the experimentation process for me. In D3, at max level you just equip every skill for a couple minutes and you have seen everything. Experimentation done after 10 minutes. I also disagree with the notion of bringing up WoW on this matter because it's a very different game. MMOs or other competitive games are very different in what they want from a player. In WoW I would be in favour of freely switching specs and to make it very convenient. The reason being it expects you to PvP, play solo, play in small groups, mid-sized groups, large groups, different forms of content and each needs a different build. Adjustment is vital and part of the game. In ARPGs you have one build for everything anyways, especially nowadays when devs are afraid to put in anything that favours, let alone requires, a certain type of playstyle or build.
Very agree and tbh in wow there are different opinions for this also for similar reasons (I like reasonably expensive respec in vanilla, on most played private servers they'd sometimes poll the players on this and last times I saw they picked a halved max respec cost 25G instead of 50G which typically amounts to maybe a few hours worth of farming at 60. And I don't consider farming to be a "waste of time", you're hanging out somewhere with other players, there's probably gonna be coop, pvp, trading. In solo game, maybe there's difficulty, maybe you die and lose something, etc. Tradeoffs.). But also very different game with for example very long leveling time. Diablo like games having a ton shorter leveling time I think they could do with super limited respecing, my opinion.
|
sigh
its pointless, but ill try it one more time:
YOU ARE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING!!
not allowing respecing FORCES me to make new chars for new builds (or worse just look up meta builds) because it affects all the things in the game you mentioned, everything does, and thus its not a valid argument to not allow it because its just as valid to allow it
for me personally the fun in games like this is trying out stuff or reacting to a neat itemdrop during lvling, which is hugely limited if respecing is very hard. (i.e. a huge impact on how i play). And switching around gear through a shared chest is just tedious, as is lvling a char (which is quite the time investment as well but that’s not even my point here). you have fun another way which is great
if you dont like the respecs how hard are you in the disadvantage in comparison?
less because you can still play your preferred way, and i really dont see a realistic way where your disadvantage for not respecing would be so huge that you arent allowed to go into coop games, earn significanly less gold for trading etc (in that case balancing would be very bad, and the game would have much bigger problems the respecing). you never brought any specific arguments except it gives an edge, but the magnitude of said edge matters a lot here
and just because your definition for longevity in a game is being forced to lvling new chars all the time doesnt mean that the game should delete all your chars every two months does it? Effectively forcing players to keep lvling chars whether they want or not would not add much to longevity either since ppl who don’t enjoy that simply quit
tldr:
free respecs let me play the way i want and you play at at least 90% effectiveness if you completely ignore it
no respecs lets me not play at all the way i like and you at 100%
i call this trade bad game design since one gives more player options then the other
|
It's not just about effectiveness and you also can't tell about "effectiveness percentages" since you don't know how different builds balance out against different bosses or contexts and their rewards. It also affects the way that for example something like a speedrun would play out or whatever. There's pros and cons about this, and then the designers can choose to do how they want it or poll players etc.
|
The people who level multiple characters, especially of the same class, are logically the vast minority of players. Every statistic that exists from every game ever tells us this.
If the 'casual' player makes a bad build that they can't respec, they just quit rather then level again.
Wanting no respecs is just the hardcore community chest beating themselves about how great they are for having 'meaningful choices' while everyone else walks away to play a more friendly game.
|
On April 03 2023 04:34 Gorsameth wrote:
The people who level multiple characters, especially of the same class, are logically the vast minority of players. Every statistic that exists from every game ever tells us this.
If the 'casual' player makes a bad build that they can't respec, they just quit rather then level again.
Wanting no respecs is just the hardcore community chest beating themselves about how great they are for having 'meaningful choices' while everyone else walks away to play a more friendly game.
I guess I'm a minority then. In GW2 for example (an MMO) I have like 4 rangers and there are classes I haven't really touched (aside from trying it out for 1-2 levels and deleting the character) over the course of the past 10+ years...
In D2 I think I made 1 druid character ever (was fun, was fury lycan) and 1 assassin, shitton of necros, sorcs and paladins though.
Personally I think that respecs are good in a limited quantity. D2 had a good approach of giving you 1 respec/difficulty, which let you adjust if necessary (and suffer the consequences until next difficulty level if you fucked up). I would also be in favor of granting everyone free respec after every major balance patch.
|
On April 03 2023 04:00 uummpaa wrote:
sigh
its pointless, but ill try it one more time:
YOU ARE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING!!
not allowing respecing FORCES me to make new chars for new builds (or worse just look up meta builds) because it affects all the things in the game you mentioned, everything does, and thus its not a valid argument to not allow it because its just as valid to allow it
for me personally the fun in games like this is trying out stuff or reacting to a neat itemdrop during lvling, which is hugely limited if respecing is very hard. (i.e. a huge impact on how i play). And switching around gear through a shared chest is just tedious, as is lvling a char (which is quite the time investment as well but that’s not even my point here). you have fun another way which is great
if you dont like the respecs how hard are you in the disadvantage in comparison?
less because you can still play your preferred way, and i really dont see a realistic way where your disadvantage for not respecing would be so huge that you arent allowed to go into coop games, earn significanly less gold for trading etc (in that case balancing would be very bad, and the game would have much bigger problems the respecing). you never brought any specific arguments except it gives an edge, but the magnitude of said edge matters a lot here
and just because your definition for longevity in a game is being forced to lvling new chars all the time doesnt mean that the game should delete all your chars every two months does it? Effectively forcing players to keep lvling chars whether they want or not would not add much to longevity either since ppl who don’t enjoy that simply quit
tldr:
free respecs let me play the way i want and you play at at least 90% effectiveness if you completely ignore it
no respecs lets me not play at all the way i like and you at 100%
i call this trade bad game design since one gives more player options then the other
No, you are the one who doesn't understand the point that is being made. I perfectly get where you are coming from. However, not every game can be for everyone. D3 wasn't for me but made the right decision for you. D4 made a different decision I'm more in favour of. If they had gone for free respecs, the game, again, wouldn't have been for me. At least not in a similar manner D2 was.
You are trying to explain to us that it doesn't make a difference for us when it obviously does. How is it so hard to understand that all the fun of decision making is gone for some people (e.g. myself) if the decision is meaningless. The disadvantage is clear: The game is not fun, period. This is the same in reverse for you without respec. So no, your TL;DR is wrong. An ARPG with free respec doesn't let me play the way I want because it isn't fun because it feels meaningless.
With longevity I didn't mean unnecessarily increasing game time for the sake of increasing game time. I hate that. I meant meaningful, as in fun, game time. Obviously that is very subjective. For you, leveling a new char isn't fun (is that true in every game?). For me it very much depends. In WoW, leveling was pure hell for me so everytime I tried that game I ended up giving up very quickly (respec didn't even matter at that point). In D2 I loved leveling new chars; to me it was a lot of the fun seeing the character grow into a full blown build. And to bring a completely different example: In GW I liked leveling new chars even though the game had free respecs with a very convenient template system. Why? Because there was more attachment to the character itself than in ARPG through the story, titles, which give meaning to your character. The experimenting also doesn't stop once you tried everything once like in an ARPG. Every zone can be different and ask for different skills. Now if D4 did the same, I would personally argue in favour of free respec but the chances for that ever happening are basically 0.
Tbf, I'm relatively sure limited respec wouldn't have saved D3 for me. The story was so attrociously obnoxious that playing through it was like constantly getting vomitted into the face. The item system was also attrocious etc. It would have taken a complete revamp of the game to make me like it.
On April 03 2023 04:34 Gorsameth wrote:
The people who level multiple characters, especially of the same class, are logically the vast minority of players. Every statistic that exists from every game ever tells us this.
If the 'casual' player makes a bad build that they can't respec, they just quit rather then level again.
Wanting no respecs is just the hardcore community chest beating themselves about how great they are for having 'meaningful choices' while everyone else walks away to play a more friendly game.
I don't think it has anything to do with being hardcore. It just depends on what you think is fun. I don't know if what you say is true or not, although I can certainly imagining it being true. However, I don't understand what your point is. To never make a game that caters to a minority of players? If yes, then I'm done arguing here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
