EPTSo there is an option difficulty for those who want the challenge that doesn't offer increased drop rates.
Why is this a problem?
If you want the challenge you use it, if you don't you don't.
Diablo IV - Page 74
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22035 Posts
So there is an option difficulty for those who want the challenge that doesn't offer increased drop rates. Why is this a problem? If you want the challenge you use it, if you don't you don't. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45203 Posts
On May 18 2023 22:29 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So... there is already an issue with the World Tiers even before launch. Tier I and II are exactly the same with no increase drop rates, so essentially a player can start in Tier I beat it and then do the capstone dungeon repeat said dungeon on Tier II and be in Tier III ala skipping Tier II immediately. I thought the only differences were supposed to be that Tier 2 had harder enemies, gave more experience, and dropped higher amounts of gold than in Tier 1? Additional items don't seem to be mentioned until tiers 3, 4, and 5: https://www.gamesradar.com/diablo-4-world-tiers/ | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17587 Posts
On May 18 2023 22:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I thought the only differences were supposed to be that Tier 2 had harder enemies, gave more experience, and dropped higher amounts of gold than in Tier 1? Additional items don't seem to be mentioned until tiers 3, 4, and 5: https://www.gamesradar.com/diablo-4-world-tiers/ Yes, it's basically a "challenge mode" with bonus experience making up a bit for the increased time it takes to kill mobs. Personally I like the approach Grim Dawn took with it, introducing "veteran mode" which was basically "normal +" for more experienced ARPG players. A bit more xp, stronger and tougher enemies but also more spawns with significantly increased chance of getting elite and boss spawns (increasing loot drops by increasing the number of mobs, not tinkering with drop chance or quality). | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
Archeon
3261 Posts
On May 18 2023 22:40 Gorsameth wrote: I fail to see the problem. So there is an option difficulty for those who want the challenge that doesn't offer increased drop rates. Why is this a problem? If you want the challenge you use it, if you don't you don't. The problem is that for a vocal part of the playerbase ARPGs seem to be grinding simulators where the goal is to get max farming speed per second and while I don't mind that people do this, it's quite annoying that these people cry murder whenever the normal progression isn't the most optimal for that. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45203 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18845 Posts
On May 20 2023 01:35 Archeon wrote: The problem is that for a vocal part of the playerbase ARPGs seem to be grinding simulators where the goal is to get max farming speed per second and while I don't mind that people do this, it's quite annoying that these people cry murder whenever the normal progression isn't the most optimal for that. Cheers to that, many of these complaints make no sense to me, but I'm just a filthy old casual looking to enjoy a game that sparks a bit of that gaming interest I find increasingly hard to come by. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On May 20 2023 01:35 Archeon wrote: The problem is that for a vocal part of the playerbase ARPGs seem to be grinding simulators where the goal is to get max farming speed per second and while I don't mind that people do this, it's quite annoying that these people cry murder whenever the normal progression isn't the most optimal for that. That's partly why I don't play at many multiplayer games nowadays. I find the most vocal segments of the playerbase of most games to be quite obnoxious. I hope Blizzard listens to more than just the noisiest people. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17587 Posts
On May 20 2023 04:31 andrewlt wrote: That's partly why I don't play at many multiplayer games nowadays. I find the most vocal segments of the playerbase of most games to be quite obnoxious. I hope Blizzard listens to more than just the noisiest people. I think it's part of the culture now, where everyone is suddenly a "gamer" and they have to "game" their games, preferably in a way that they're familiar with so similar or even the same features are being included in all games regardless of their genre etc. Kinda sad really. When you look at the amount of time and resources that have to be put into a game for it to be a live service with multiple progression systems, cash shop, competitive whatever, seasonal content and such it's staggering. And all for a game that would be perfectly fine as a single player stand-alone game with potential expansions. Not only does it take more time and effort to do it, there's much higher chance of doing it wrong, almost certain the original idea behind it is going to be lost and bigger pressure for it to do well to recoup all this extra cost (not to mention much higher maintenance costs). It's madness in my opinion. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
I mean that I don't see why everything has to be turned into a competitive endeavor. Single player games don't need to be balanced. Part of the beauty of something like Total War is that some factions and start positions are harder than others. Multiplayer coop games (and Diablo is firmly in this category) don't need to be as balanced as competitive games. They should fix exploits and nerf clear outliers but some builds having faster optimal farming speeds than others is ok. | ||
|
KrillinFromwales
65 Posts
On May 20 2023 07:08 Manit0u wrote: I think it's part of the culture now, where everyone is suddenly a "gamer" and they have to "game" their games, preferably in a way that they're familiar with so similar or even the same features are being included in all games regardless of their genre etc. Kinda sad really. When you look at the amount of time and resources that have to be put into a game for it to be a live service with multiple progression systems, cash shop, competitive whatever, seasonal content and such it's staggering. And all for a game that would be perfectly fine as a single player stand-alone game with potential expansions. Not only does it take more time and effort to do it, there's much higher chance of doing it wrong, almost certain the original idea behind it is going to be lost and bigger pressure for it to do well to recoup all this extra cost (not to mention much higher maintenance costs). It's madness in my opinion. yeah i agree with this. there's not a lot of fresh blood in games these days and it doesn't seem like there's an emphasis on going outside the game design meta. tbh i think some simpler features that just extended a long way could be nice. i wouldn't mind chuckling at level 666 characters running around in diablo 4. modern games seem so complex that the equilibria are sort of greyish | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
More discourse about World Tier 1 & 2... | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17587 Posts
On May 20 2023 08:44 andrewlt wrote: Oh, I don't mind having some live service elements in the games I play. I thought that Civ 6 and Total War: Warhammer, for example, were better served by having constant updates that could only come from having a constant stream of revenue. With that said, the budget and profit expectations are much higher for Diablo 4. Having 4 seasons a year sounds too much though I suppose I'm planning on playing nonseasonal content mostly. I mean that I don't see why everything has to be turned into a competitive endeavor. Single player games don't need to be balanced. Part of the beauty of something like Total War is that some factions and start positions are harder than others. Multiplayer coop games (and Diablo is firmly in this category) don't need to be as balanced as competitive games. They should fix exploits and nerf clear outliers but some builds having faster optimal farming speeds than others is ok. Civ and TWWH aren't really live service though. You can play them offline, single player, mod them to your heart's content and buy only the DLC you want, you don't have to be running the always online forced multiplayer with everything on top. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
aseq
Netherlands3992 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22035 Posts
its arguing for the sake of it because the internet drama machine must be fed and is never satiated. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45203 Posts
On May 22 2023 04:53 aseq wrote: Pff I've heard little else than WT1 vs WT2 for the last week. Is it really that important? I hope Blizz just changes 1 number to scale up gear rewards too for WT2 so everyone is wrong. Nope, not at all. As was noted by many people, there are reasons why someone may choose to play WT1 (e.g., quicker gameplay) and other reasons why someone may choose to play WT2 (e.g., enjoying a challenge), and it's completely subjective and relative. It's a non-issue. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
| ||
