Support NeoGAF

[kyubajin]

You won't ever hit with your weapon unless you're a barbarian and it's a weapon using skill. 3/5 classes actively generate resource with skills so it's always a completely irrational decision to ever use your basic attack. One class (Wizard) has free spells that do as much or more damage as your weapon does with far more versatility (Spectral Blade is basically a better melee attack anyway). The WD in theory might want to use a basic wand attack when low on mana very early in the game but will soon have enough mana regen that several of the low cost attacks are ultimately resource positive.

As for un-runed skills? You were NEVER going to use unruned skills because they were always intrinsically worse than runed skills. All skills have runes that add as direct improvements to the base skill even if a small number of runes do eliminate the base functionality completely. You would use un-runed skills over runed skills when the skill you like doesn't have a runed version yet.

Ultimately D3 is no less on rails than D2 you just can't make any mistakes in your build. If you wanted to build a character in D2 you had to know exactly when you could start spending points and exactly how to spend them. Often to do it perfectly well you had to spend 30/40 levels using singularly bad skills or only having one active skill to use. A vast majority of builds in D2 relied on one or two spammable skills and had no resource management at all due to broken resource regeneration mechanics.

The fact is all characters will have complicated resource management decisions to make that blow away every character customization decision anyone ever made in Diablo 2. Every skill you choose for your build has to fit your resource management profile which is balanced with the type of gear you have and what you're trying to accomplish from a gameplay/style methodology. Each class has a number of tools to both generate and spend resources in multiple fashions. This depth was readily apparent from the day they released the skill calculator on their site; there's really such a stupid number of interesting builds you can make that you'd have to be a real boring person to not come up with your own unique build.

I understand this. I'm very glad I won't be needing to create 10 different Necros (I mean Witch Doctors) to try out all the builds that interest me, I'm all for it. I disagree nonetheless with the progressive Blizzard's-way of unlocking runeskills, and I do understand that I will only need to level up 1 class all the way to 60 before I have all runeskills to play with. However, why not let me choose which runestone to unlock? The system is already WAY permissive towards failure and commitment, so this only limits even more the creativity of the player until they get to 60 (possibly in midway on Hell).

Ultimately, I really like just hitting my weapon... specially as a barbarian ;____;

 

[Fallout-NL]

You won't ever hit with your weapon unless you're a barbarian and it's a weapon using skill. 3/5 classes actively generate resource with skills so it's always a completely irrational decision to ever use your basic attack. One class (Wizard) has free spells that do as much or more damage as your weapon does with far more versatility (Spectral Blade is basically a better melee attack anyway). The WD in theory might want to use a basic wand attack when low on mana very early in the game but will soon have enough mana regen that several of the low cost attacks are ultimately resource positive.

As for un-runed skills? You were NEVER going to use unruned skills because they were always intrinsically worse than runed skills. All skills have runes that add as direct improvements to the base skill even if a small number of runes do eliminate the base functionality completely. You would use un-runed skills over runed skills when the skill you like doesn't have a runed version yet.

Ultimately D3 is no less on rails than D2 you just can't make any mistakes in your build. If you wanted to build a character in D2 you had to know exactly when you could start spending points and exactly how to spend them. Often to do it perfectly well you had to spend 30/40 levels using singularly bad skills or only having one active skill to use. A vast majority of builds in D2 relied on one or two spammable skills and had no resource management at all due to broken resource regeneration mechanics.

The fact is all characters will have complicated resource management decisions to make that blow away every character customization decision anyone ever made in Diablo 2. Every skill you choose for your build has to fit your resource management profile which is balanced with the type of gear you have and what you're trying to accomplish from a gameplay/style methodology. Each class has a number of tools to both generate and spend resources in multiple fashions. This depth was readily apparent from the day they released the skill calculator on their site; there's really such a stupid number of interesting builds you can make that you'd have to be a real boring person to not come up with your own unique build.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. The game is designed to make you feel awesome the whole time, and a regular weapon hit just isn't that enticing compared to say a Cleave, or a Magic Missile. Cleave and Magic Missile aren't so strong that they wipe out hoards of enemies instantly, but they provide you an interesting filler for in between your Whirlwinds and Arcane Orbs, etc.

Yeah, that just sucks to me. I enjoyed just using a sword for a while as a necro until I had something of a mana pool. Granted, that's no longer necessary in DIII. So yes, of course it makes sense in this system. But they went to far in dumbing everything down /zoning everything off.

 

[forrest]

As soon as the dedicated potion button came into effect, they removed the ability to map basic attack and all passives that affected basic attacks. There were enough hotbar spots for your abilites, basic attack, and potions.

 

[thetrin]

Console development team says hi! This new UI just screams it.

What? No it doesn't. Nothing about the UI screams consoles at all.

 

[forrest]

At least I understand your issue now but I have to say it's ultimately so minor and such a small portion of the game it's probably not even on their radar as being meaningful. The swapping issue I completely agree with and found it really annoying to move skills around my hotbar because of the system they're using.

There is some tweaking needed (I really wish Elective mode just eliminated all of the 'guided skill' layout and made it similar to the previous beta setup) but all the signs out there are that this is the near final build for release right now. The only thing I could see them changing is adding a bit more detailed explanation on how to change to elective mode early in the game and shoring up some tooltips for the UI.

I wouldn't be so sure. There have been 3 extensive threads on the beta feedback forums just for the skill UI. So I'm pretty sure they are aware of all the issues people are having with the UI including the locked hotbar.

-New- Skill Window U.I. is... "Awful". (Pt.3)

 

[erragal]

I wouldn't be so sure. There have been 3 extensive threads on the beta feedback forums just for the skill UI. So I'm pretty sure they are aware of all the issues people are having with the UI including the locked hotbar.

-New- Skill Window U.I. is... "Awful". (Pt.3)

No doubt it needs changed but it's also obvious that the new UI is a rush job for release and not really up to part with any of the other UI elements. Make no mistake: I'd be happy if they fix it up a little bit before release but I'm skeptical just based on the PR coming out of late; they're ready to get this game out the door sooner rather than later and UI elements aren't a barrier to them in the same way a skill system problem would be.

 

[perfectnight]

I don't like the new UI but it also seems to me like they are in release rush, and it probably won't be seeing any major changes until post release. I can live with the UI if it means we can have Diablo in April like so many rumors are saying.

 

[forrest]

No doubt it needs changed but it's also obvious that the new UI is a rush job for release and not really up to part with any of the other UI elements. Make no mistake: I'd be happy if they fix it up a little bit before release but I'm skeptical just based on the PR coming out of late; they're ready to get this game out the door sooner rather than later and UI elements aren't a barrier to them in the same way a skill system problem would be.

UI not being a barrier, I attribute to it being fairly easy to change and iterate on. The rune/skill system itself is not, which is why I believe it's in its final incarnation. I do think we will see UI changes regardless of the PR statements being made in relation to release date. Just my two cents though.

 

[maabus1999]

What? No it doesn't. Nothing about the UI screams consoles at all.

For skill selection in non-elective mode? It seems very intuitive for a console style UI. Simpilfy the skills to 6 buttons and have them do similar effects so that the console player gets used to what each button does. Just looking at the screen I could see them placing button icons next to each box.

 

[Fallout-NL]

I wouldn't be so sure. There have been 3 extensive threads on the beta feedback forums just for the skill UI. So I'm pretty sure they are aware of all the issues people are having with the UI including the locked hotbar.

-New- Skill Window U.I. is... "Awful". (Pt.3)

Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one.

 

[tjohn86]

Played through the beta again yesterday as a monk. Fun class. The new skill changes do dumb down the game a bit but at this point I just want it to release!

 

[Rentahamster]

Take 100 posters in this thread and have them all build a sorceress in Diablo 2 and a Wizard in Diablo 3. You could find a great deal of sorceress with points in the exact same skills, but you would have a hard time to find two Wizards that chose the 6 exact same skills/runes.

That's not really a good comparison for two reasons.

1. The number of unique skills available to a wizard and sorceress are different, so of course there are going to be more Wizard builds since the number of possible permutations of combinations of skills is vastly larger.

Diablo II Sorceress: 30 unique skills and passives.

Diablo III Wizard: (25 skills x 5 runes) + 15 passives = 140 unique skills and passives

Character diversity will be very limiting at the lower levels, since every player has the exact same skill development, but as you reach a higher level and have more runes available to you, players should be able to diversify. Key word: "should". It's still pointless that they even need to restrict this.

2. Diablo II has been out for over a decade. People already know the game inside and out. Diablo III hasn't even come out yet. Give players 10 years to run through Diablo III and they'll find the optimal setups as well.

 

[V_Arnold]

Character diversity will be very limiting at the lower levels, since every player has the exact same skill development, but as you reach a higher level and have more runes available to you, players should be able to diversify. Key word: "should". It's still pointless that they even need to restrict this.

Sorry, but that is bullshit. Even in the beta, you are already not able to use even half of what is available to you on one skill setup, and at one point, even if you enjoy your current skillset for A FEW LEVELS (which can be anything between 4-10 minutes to half an hour, not really much more), you will find yourself with a lot more unlocked stuff that you can extensively try without leveling up again and finding yet another skill or skill rune... and another, and another..and another.

 

[perfectnight]

To be honest, runes unlock every single level so there will be no dead zone. You will have something new to try every level. I still prefer the choose your rune method every time you level though.

 

[Rentahamster]

Sorry, but that is bullshit. Even in the beta, you are already not able to use even half of what is available to you on one skill setup, and at one point, even if you enjoy your current skillset for A FEW LEVELS (which can be anything between 4-10 minutes to half an hour, not really much more), you will find yourself with a lot more unlocked stuff that you can extensively try without leveling up again and finding yet another skill or skill rune... and another, and another..and another.

Um, you just restated what I said. You have a lower pool of potential skills at lower levels, and a higher pool of potential skills at higher levels. I'm not exactly sure what your point of contention is here.

 

[hobart]

I think a lot of you are coming from that nostalgic D2 place that I simply cannot relate.

I come from a WoW perspective. I played pretty hardcore... up until the release of Cataclysm... in a server competitive (at times nationally) PvE raiding guild. I know a lot about min/maxing and theorycrafting and shared concepts (but never math!) with other hardcore end-game raiders.

I like taking certain aspects of the game from my hands. To know that my character will be built in the proper fashion is a care I like not having. Now, I understand this is a personal opinion and one that many D2 enthusiasts are going to miss. But... let me just say... from where I came from... I spent HOURS upon HOURS researching and collecting proper gear for my character. PvP sets, PvE sets, Tank sets, DPS set, Magic Find set, Gold % Drop set........ this is what I will be doing in this game. I find it VASTLY more engaging collecting gear than I do with the fear that I could be placing a SINGLE point in the wrong leveling category.

And I do want to tell you.... I fear it. Down right scared of it. If I were to ever place a skill point in the wrong slot I would worry about it for the rest of the D3 career.

What's an AMAZING prospect to me in D3 is the fact that I very well may have MULTIPLE, VIABLE, skills to choose during end-game. This, above all else, is the single most important end-game change that I happily await! And it very well may be an important aspect during the leveling process as well. For those of you who share the same WoW experience as I do... you can relate with me in that it gets rather... tiresome... playing the game day after day after day reciting the same rotation over and over and over. It would seem, right now, that D3 is trying desperately hard towards breaking that PURE ROTATION gameplay. For me... to simply find 12 viable skills useful as opposed to, like, 5 that I used in WoW.... is refreshing and welcomed.

I admit that I do not come from the same D2 backgrounds as many of you... and it would seem that most of you cherish the time spent spending points foolishly in their builds...... or spending hours playing with every minutia of their character (and I get it). But for me... I would rather spend my time min/maxing in the areas I know will absolutely matter in the long run with character builds that I would generally look up on the internet anyway.

 

[V_Arnold]

Um, you just restated what I said. You have a lower pool of potential skills at lower levels, and a higher pool of potential skills at higher levels. I'm not exactly sure what your point of contention is here.

Oh lol, the first sentence got messed up in my head. Sorry
Yeah, we agree then. But the diversity will be present in the lower levels as well, if we see the lv10-13 zone in the Beta as an example.

 

[perfectnight]

I think a lot of you are coming from that nostalgic D2 place that I simply cannot relate.

I come from a WoW perspective. I played pretty hardcore... up until the release of Cataclysm... in a server competitive (at times nationally) PvE raiding guild. I know a lot about min/maxing and theorycrafting and shared concepts (but never math!) with other hardcore end-game raiders.

I like taking certain aspects of the game from my hands. To know that my character will be built in the proper fashion is a care I like not having. Now, I understand this is a personal opinion and one that many D2 enthusiasts are going to miss. But... let me just say... from where I came from... I spent HOURS upon HOURS researching and collecting proper gear for my character. PvP sets, PvE sets, Tank sets, DPS set, Magic Find set, Gold % Drop set........ this is what I will be doing in this game. I find it VASTLY more engaging collecting gear than I do with the fear that I could be placing a SINGLE point in the wrong leveling category.

And I do want to tell you.... I fear it. Down right scared of it. If I were to ever place a skill point in the wrong slot I would worry about it for the rest of the D3 career.

What's an AMAZING prospect to me in D3 is the fact that I very well may have MULTIPLE, VIABLE, skills to choose during end-game. This, above all else, is the single most important end-game change that I happily await! And it very well may be an important aspect during the leveling process as well. For those of you who share the same WoW experience as I do... you can relate with me in that it gets rather... tiresome... playing the game day after day after day reciting the same rotation over and over and over. It would seem, right now, that D3 is trying desperately hard towards breaking that PURE ROTATION gameplay. For me... to simply find 12 viable skills useful as opposed to, like, 5 that I used in WoW.... is refreshing and welcomed.

I admit that I do not come from the same D2 backgrounds as many of you... and it would seem that most of you cherish the time spent spending points foolishly in their builds...... or spending hours playing with every minutia of their character (and I get it). But for me... I would rather spend my time min/maxing in the areas I know will absolutely matter in the long run with character builds that I would generally look up on the internet anyway.

I've been playing D2 since release and I completely agree with you. I have neither the time or interest anymore in having to build new characters every time I want to try something new. Pretty much all my D2 buddies feel the same way.

 

[jkoch]

I started playing the beta recently and I have two questions.

Is there any way to start a game without picking a quest? I just want to hit the nearest waypoint and then kill the Skeleton King, but I can't figure out how to do that.

When I click the button to join a public game, nothing happens. It also says there are zero public games available. Am I missing something?

 

[Rentahamster]

I find it VASTLY more engaging collecting gear than I do with the fear that I could be placing a SINGLE point in the wrong leveling category.

This part of the game hasn't really been an issue every since the devs made it so that essentially every skill you have has "max points" and its power scales to your level and weapon damage.

Some people have been arguing for some portion of permanence and gimpability, but not me. And I doubt that all but a small portion of those arguing for some kind of allowance for wrong decisions want to see it as debilitating as it was in Diablo II.

The point of disagreement that we have with the devs is not that issue that I quoted above, it's the further removal of game mechanics that involve the player, give him choice, and feel like he is the driving force in his character's evolution. As opposed to a more automated system that ditches a lot of the more complex and interesting ideas that used to be in the game.

I've been playing D2 since release and I completely agree with you. I have neither the time or interest anymore in having to build new characters every time I want to try something new. Pretty much all my D2 buddies feel the same way.

Ok great, but this isn't really the main issue a lot of us have with the new system. Most of us agree that forcing players to reroll all the time isn't such a great thing.

 

[Rentahamster]

Oh lol, the first sentence got messed up in my head. Sorry
Yeah, we agree then. But the diversity will be present in the lower levels as well, if we see the lv10-13 zone in the Beta as an example.

Yes, it's present, but relatively lower. And it doesn't need to be. If we could just pick and choose the runes ourselves, diversity at lower levels will be larger, and it gives players more freedom to experiment in a variety of scenarios.

 

[forrest]

I started playing the beta recently and I have two questions.

Is there any way to start a game without picking a quest? I just want to hit the nearest waypoint and then kill the Skeleton King, but I can't figure out how to do that.

When I click the button to join a public game, nothing happens. It also says there are zero public games available. Am I missing something?

It's bugged. Choose a new quest for yourself and load that game up. Leave the game back to the main menu. You should now be able to join a public game. Unfortunately, you have to do this everytime you join a new public game.

Youll know it worked if your public game quest text is present in the Menu Screen as opposed to saying "Blah Blah Blah quest text here"

 

[jkoch]

It's bugged. Choose a new quest for yourself and load that game up. Leave the game back to the main menu. You should now be able to join a public game. Unfortunately, you have to do this everytime you join a new public game.

Youll know it worked if your public game quest text is present in the Menu Screen as opposed to saying "Blah Blah Blah quest text here"

Thanks!

 

[perfectnight]

This part of the game hasn't really been an issue every since the devs made it so that essentially every skill you have has "max points" and its power scales to your level and weapon damage.

Some people have been arguing for some portion of permanence and gimpability, but not me. And I doubt that all but a small portion of those arguing for some kind of allowance for wrong decisions want to see it as debilitating as it was in Diablo II.

The point of disagreement that we have with the devs is not that issue that I quoted above, it's the further removal of game mechanics that involve the player, give him choice, and feel like he is the driving force in his character's evolution. As opposed to a more automated system that ditches a lot of the more complex and interesting ideas that used to be in the game.



Ok great, but this isn't really the main issue a lot of us have with the new system. Most of us agree that forcing players to reroll all the time isn't such a great thing.

I get that a lot of people want the point based skill tree and permanent, super specialized builds. This isn't diablo 3 though and it is not going to change. D3's combat is fundamentally designed around using 6 skills in combat as opposed to D2's 1 or 2 main ones. This goes against the very nature of building characters that are good at one thing and one thing only. Kind of fruitless to keep talking about things that aren't going to change at this point in development (like the art direction) but hey I'm not trying to stop discussions or anything.

 

[Rentahamster]

D3's combat is fundamentally designed around using 6 skills in combat as opposed to D2's 1 or 2 main ones. This goes against the very nature of building characters that are good at one thing and one thing only.

Okay, but that's not something I have a problem with. I happen to like that part of D3.

What I don't like is the elimination of rune itemization, as well as the new "on-rails" approach to skill unlocking, and the unneeded oversimplifications that are in place to coddle the casuals at the expense of core players.

 

[erragal]

I get that a lot of people want the point based skill tree and permanent, super specialized builds. This isn't diablo 3 though and it is not going to change. D3's combat is fundamentally designed around using 6 skills in combat as opposed to D2's 1 or 2 main ones. This goes against the very nature of building characters that are good at one thing and one thing only. Kind of fruitless to keep talking about things that aren't going to change at this point in development (like the art direction) but hey I'm not trying to stop discussions or anything.

That's not really what he's saying.

Rentahamster wants you to be able to choose which rune you get when you have a rune selection. He believes that having control over the order you choose runes in gives the player a sense of control over their development as they level. His argument is that because the runes are supposed to be relatively equal the level you acquire them shouldn't matter.

I don't necessarily agree with his points (I don't think the runes are actually 'created equally' and even a temporarily irrevocable decision goes against their core design goals) but he's never really expressed any desire to have skill points return or have any decision be permanent. It's more that some people don't feel attached to their character unless they are 'making choices' at level up, even if they're ultimately illusionary choices.

 

[perfectnight]

Okay, but that's not something I have a problem with. I happen to like that part of D3.

What I don't like is the elimination of rune itemization, as well as the new "on-rails" approach to skill unlocking, and the unneeded oversimplifications that are in place to coddle the casuals at the expense of core players.

Ah okay sorry I misunderstood you. I agree about the on rails skill runes.

 

[hobart]

Kinda hard to argue against being able to select your runes as you level. I don't specifically mind having them handed to me... it may lead me to use a skill I wouldn't normally think of using because it provides a "cool" or "useful" bonus... but having THAT choice would be welcome.

But, again, I think not having it lends heavily in having a player try more skills. I'm speaking from my own experience... I think I tend to fall in love with a single skill and would simply want to power it out through the course of the game as opposed to experimenting with new combinations.

 

[Rentahamster]

I think I tend to fall in love with a single skill and would simply want to power it out through the course of the game as opposed to experimenting with new combinations.

And if a player wants to play like that, I really don't see any good reason why he should be prevented from doing so.

 

[ts91]

Just got my key!

I try to sign in and get an incorrect password error, I look on the forums/online with the error code and see a huge amount of hate from players and blizzard saying that its a problem with no ETA on the fix.


just.my.luck.

Third world problems here.

 

[Artanisix]

Whatever. The fanbase is a poisonous well and Blizzard should do their game and not listen to these crazy people who can think up "better" systems in the head as they are posting. You will have your crow served in a short while.

Truth.

 

[John_B]

Blizzard has in essence removed what was a HUGE part of Diablo II, one of the core aspects that made the game so appealing and enticing.

In short, I feel IMHO that they dumbed the leveling process too much, but did a good job with endgame.

That was not the Diablo 2 experience. You planned your character outside the game, then struggled for many levels until you gained enough skills and decent gear to make the build work. After that point you could only grow the character in power.

Diablo 3 is just fun straight from the go. You don't wait for some unknown point were your character starts to work, it just does from the beginning, and you can mess around with it as crazy as you like when new skills becomes available.

I'm not saying the Diablo 3 system is perfect, but it really fixes most of the wrongs in Diablo 2. And that seems like the correct path for the series.

That's not really a good comparison for two reasons.

1. The number of unique skills available to a wizard and sorceress are different, so of course there are going to be more Wizard builds since the number of possible permutations of combinations of skills is vastly larger.

Diablo II Sorceress: 30 unique skills and passives.

Diablo III Wizard: (25 skills x 5 runes) + 15 passives = 140 unique skills and passives

More people in Diablo 2 ended up with the same skills because the further down the skill tree you went, the better the skills were. So there were clearly obvious choices to go for.

In Diablo 3 - Bash, Cleave and Fury are all different attacks, but none clearly superior. So out of a 100 builds all those 3 skills will be fairly used. In Diablo 2 out of a 100 builds, pretty much none would use Ice Bolt or Ice Blast over Frozen Orb.

2. Diablo II has been out for over a decade. People already know the game inside and out. Diablo III hasn't even come out yet. Give players 10 years to run through Diablo III and they'll find the optimal setups as well.

Diablo 3 will be much more varied in gameplay and I think there will probably be optimal setups for Hardcore/Bosses/Arena/MF etc. The point is still - that even though your crazy fun build might not be the most effective, it will still be playable.

 

[duckroll]

The problem here is that you're arguing against something that I would think most people are not really saying. This is not about "no respec + crappy skills which can fuck you up if you choose poorly" vs "instant skill choosing + tons of good skills and variations to pick from".

If you compare it take way, one is definitely better than the other because when it comes down to it Diablo 2 had many poorly designed skills which you can continue to put points into at no benefit. Is that bad design? YES. It also meant that if you wanted to fix that, you would basically have to run through a new character again just to farm skill points to respec. Is that bad design? Probably, mostly because of the way it was implemented.

But that's not the main beef people have with the implementation with Diablo 3. Let's take the Wizard for example. 25 skills across 6 categories. In each category, the 3-5 skills in them are not better or worse than each other. Instead they each serve a different sort of gameplay style. Why not let the player choose which skill in each category to learn in the order they want as they level up? The same goes for runes. The runes for each category are unlocked bit by bit with each level, but you are level able to choose which runes to unlock in a given category. One is not better than another, so why?

Since they are different, there isn't really a balance issue. Why force players into a guided Blizzard Tour for the first 30 levels for skills and first 60 levels for runes? It seems that simply building the game around giving casual players an auto-level option, and more experienced players a way to craft their journey through the first 60 levels of a class, would end up pleasing pretty much both sides as far as the existing skill system supports.

Seriously, is there any reason to argue AGAINST this?


Edit: Also, you might not want to insult people by going "they should just ignore the fanbase because they know better and everyone will be owned". That is rude and it is not an argument. It is dismissive and non-contributive.

 

[Fallout-NL]

Diablo 3 will be much more varied in gameplay and I think there will probably be optimal setups for Hardcore/Bosses/Arena/MF etc. The point is still - that even though your crazy fun build might not be the most effective, it will still be playable.

Like Duckroll says, I think (most of us) are not arguing against this design philosophy. It's just that the current version doesn't allow for any variation at all, to the point that you're basically fighting the UI for a specific placement on the action bar. Also, the rigid adherence to Blizzard's idea of ideal left/right mouse buttons skills is pretty jarring. It's terrible and I actively dislike what they're doing here.

/edit: And it's not like I don't want to like this game either. I'm a big fan of Diablo 1 and 2 (huge, actually), I already mourn the loss of the style of those games, but I've accepted that. I've also accepted the disappearance of skill points, skill trees, the incredibly low difficulty of what's in the beta. I'm o.k. with all of it. I understand. But I'm drawing a line in the sand here. They need to come back from the fucking brink. I don't think the game's going to be any fun like this. You're not investing anything, or building shit. And all of the nothing you're doing is exactly as intended by Blizz's idiot proofing department. Bah.

 

[hobart]

So it boils down to: Are the unlockable skills better as we move on?

Honestly, I don't know. I've heard people say yes... I've heard people say no. I'd love to play with Whirlwind to find out... but I'll just have to wait. I think, logically, if you say that there are no advantages to the unlocked skills at the end of the leveling path... then you HAVE to agree with duckroll that there is simply no point to having those skills unlock on a railed path fashion.

The ONLY argument I can think of is that they want you to explore all aspects of your character. And the only other reason I can think that they would do that is because the single player experience will require you to utilize all your skills and, therefore, requires full knowledge of the character. I think that's pretty weak, personally, because I would love to cater my experience as I see fit with the 6 skills I choose. Period.

But, again, it doesn't bother me like it does others because I think I am coming from a different place. The real meat and potatoes for me will come when I hit max level and I'm min/maxing thru gear and, from what I'm told, affixes.

 

[Mengy]

The problem here is that you're arguing against something that I would think most people are not really saying. This is not about "no respec + crappy skills which can fuck you up if you choose poorly" vs "instant skill choosing + tons of good skills and variations to pick from".

If you compare it take way, one is definitely better than the other because when it comes down to it Diablo 2 had many poorly designed skills which you can continue to put points into at no benefit. Is that bad design? YES. It also meant that if you wanted to fix that, you would basically have to run through a new character again just to farm skill points to respec. Is that bad design? Probably, mostly because of the way it was implemented.

But that's not the main beef people have with the implementation with Diablo 3. Let's take the Wizard for example. 25 skills across 6 categories. In each category, the 3-5 skills in them are not better or worse than each other. Instead they each serve a different sort of gameplay style. Why not let the player choose which skill in each category to learn in the order they want as they level up? The same goes for runes. The runes for each category are unlocked bit by bit with each level, but you are level able to choose which runes to unlock in a given category. One is not better than another, so why?

Since they are different, there isn't really a balance issue. Why force players into a guided Blizzard Tour for the first 30 levels for skills and first 60 levels for runes? It seems that simply building the game around giving casual players an auto-level option, and more experienced players a way to craft their journey through the first 60 levels of a class, would end up pleasing pretty much both sides as far as the existing skill system supports.

Seriously, is there any reason to argue AGAINST this?

This is my whole point exactly. The only argument against Duckroll's is simply because Blizzard wants us to level and play along a predetermined path. And many players want to choose their path.


The way the beta is now, we all face the exact same choices on the road to 60. That just seems both dumb and lazy to me. It all becomes moot at level 60 anyway, but getting to 60 should be interesting and fun too.

 

[duckroll]

The way the beta is now, we all face the exact same choices on the road to 60. That just seems both dumb and lazy to me. It all becomes moot at level 60 anyway, but getting to 60 should be interesting and fun too.

This is exactly my point. Thank you. I feel that ultimately, it's true that when we all get to lvl60 with every class, and we're in Nightmare, these discussions might not matter. But that doesn't mean that the journey there cannot be made more fun and interesting for those who prefer one sort of progression play style over something simpler.

 

[Themacabre]

That was not the Diablo 2 experience. You planned your character outside the game

Maybe you did. I didn't.

 

[KKRT00]

Blizzard's path also limits low level pvp builds substantially.

 

[duckroll]

Blizzard path also limits low level pvp builds substantially.

That's okay too! After all, PVP is pretty unsubstantial now! No more turning hostile in a game! Arena combat only! Lolol.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

The ambient occlusion makes this game looks a bit better. Liking it.

 

[Sothpaw]

This is exactly my point. Thank you. I feel that ultimately, it's true that when we all get to lvl60 with every class, and we're in Nightmare, these discussions might not matter. But that doesn't mean that the journey there cannot be made more fun and interesting for those who prefer one sort of progression play style over something simpler.

The thing is, I would imagine the journey to level 60 will comprise about 0.01% of your total play time on a character.

 

[V_Arnold]

Duckroll, I have absolutely nothing against your system, except that I see no point in making a restriction once there is no need to have that. How should players know what to choose if they cannot possibly experience the skill itself but simply a tooltip and a short description?

Yes, that is what "make new characters" are good for, but that age is over.
So regardless, I have nothing against your system, and I would not argue against it. But I also happen to have nothing against Blizzard's current system.

 

[Zeliard]

So another treadmill to the endgame, eh? Oy, Blizzard.

 

[duckroll]

The thing is, I would imagine the journey to level 60 will comprise about 0.01% of your total play time on a character.

I would not say that is accurate. It currently takes about 1 hour to run through the beta content with a new character, and on average I end up at lvl7-8 by the end of that. This is supposed to be just a portion of Act 1. So I assume that Act 1 will take about 3-4 hours to complete, and maybe 5 hours to complete all the quests in it. I don't know how many Acts are in the game in total, but let's say the game takes about 20-25 hours to complete the first time on Normal. I'll say it is likely that you'll have a lvl40 character by the end of that on average (pulling stats out of my ass, feel free to correct me if Blizzard has said anything specific on this). So then the next difficulty is unlocked, and to bring that character to lvl60 in multiplayer on the harder mode would probably take another 5-10 hours of gameplay, while farming items and whatnot.

So we're looking at 30+ hours to get a character to lvl60 playing through the game for the first time. I don't feel this is going to represent 0.01% of playtime for a character for the average player. Because that would mean you actually think the average Diablo 3 player is going to spend 300,000 hours on that one character in total. Wtf?

 

[Valnen]

That's okay too! After all, PVP is pretty unsubstantial now! No more turning hostile in a game! Arena combat only! Lolol.

I don't want people joining my games and turning hostile anyway. I don't even want that to be an option, that's just poison for a game that's supposed to be centered around co-op.

 

[Sothpaw]

I would not say that is accurate. It currently takes about 1 hour to run through the beta content with a new character, and on average I end up at lvl7-8 by the end of that. This is supposed to be just a portion of Act 1. So I assume that Act 1 will take about 3-4 hours to complete, and maybe 5 hours to complete all the quests in it. I don't know how many Acts are in the game in total, but let's say the game takes about 20-25 hours to complete the first time on Normal. I'll say it is likely that you'll have a lvl40 character by the end of that on average (pulling stats out of my ass, feel free to correct me if Blizzard has said anything specific on this). So then the next difficulty is unlocked, and to bring that character to lvl60 in multiplayer on the harder mode would probably take another 5-10 hours of gameplay, while farming items and whatnot.

So we're looking at 30+ hours to get a character to lvl60 playing through the game for the first time. I don't feel this is going to represent 0.01% of playtime for a character for the average player. Because that would mean you actually think the average Diablo 3 player is going to spend 300,000 hours on that one character in total. Wtf?

Sarcasm is a pain to detect on the internet haha. OK then let's say 90% of a character's total life isn't spent at max level. Still nothing really to worry about imo.

One thing I will say though is that I don't understand why they took development time to change the skill system to what it is now. Seemed fine in the last patch to me.

 

[duckroll]

Duckroll, I have absolutely nothing against your system, except that I see no point in making a restriction once there is no need to have that. How should players know what to choose if they cannot possibly experience the skill itself but simply a tooltip and a short description?

Yes, that is what "make new characters" are good for, but that age is over.
So regardless, I have nothing against your system, and I would not argue against it. But I also happen to have nothing against Blizzard's current system.

I don't even know what you are arguing anymore. It seems that at this point you're just going on and on about how while you don't disagree with my point, you don't care about it personally and you feel that how I want to play my games is pointless and stupid and there is no place for it in the market today so you don't care. That's basically what it sounds like, and if that's what you think I really don't see a point in replying seriously to it.

Sarcasm is a pain to detect on the internet haha. OK then let's say 90% of a character's total life isn't spent at max level. Still nothing really to worry about imo.

One thing I will say though is that I don't understand why they took development time to change the skill system to what it is now. Seemed fine in the last patch to me.

Is, or isn't? There's a big difference there.

My main point is just that 30+ hours of gameplay is nothing to scoff at. Especially when that is the first 30 hours that a gamer will be playing a new game, and it is how that game is introduced to them. If the design is such that there are enough things about it which turn a person off, it might render any possible post-game play time irrelevant, since that person might not even be interested in finishing the game.

I want Blizzard to make the game as enjoyable as possible not just for post-game multiplayer, but for every single moment in the game. I don't think that is too much to ask when we're talking about a game which sells millions and has been in development for many, many years.

 

[Rentahamster]

Rentahamster wants you to be able to choose which rune you get when you have a rune selection. He believes that having control over the order you choose runes in gives the player a sense of control over their development as they level. His argument is that because the runes are supposed to be relatively equal the level you acquire them shouldn't matter.

Yeah, that's most of my position, right there. Nice summary

It's more that some people don't feel attached to their character unless they are 'making choices' at level up, even if they're ultimately illusionary choices.

How are they "ultimately illusory choices"? If the choice was illusory, then the game design would be such that I have 5 choices of rune, but only one of them is any good, leading me to choose that one. The "illusion" of choice. In D3, I would think that all 5 rune choices are equally valid (and should be).

But I guess since you think that the runes aren't created equally, I can see how you can come to the conclusion that the choices are illusory.

If that is the case, that certain runes are better than others, then that leads to a lessening of diversity of builds since players will naturally flock to the "better" runes and ignore the weaker ones. This is a flaw that I feel will be present in the new system.

 

[TylerD]

I don't know how many Acts are in the game in total, but let's say the game takes about 20-25 hours to complete the first time on Normal. I'll say it is likely that you'll have a lvl40 character by the end of that on average (pulling stats out of my ass, feel free to correct me if Blizzard has said anything specific on this).

I remember seeing a video saying that they expect a player to be around 25 at the end of normal and 45-50 after nightmare. I can't find it but I am almost positive that is correct but maybe they have changed that too. Not as relevant to the discussion at hand, but I remember them saying that once you hit 60 you aren't going to be ready for inferno most likely and will need to find better gear.