Originally posted by uohaloran

I'm sure I'm echoing the sentiments of what has already been posted in here, at least I hope I am...

The game sold tremendously well and Blizzard is surely doing pretty good with their cuts from the RMAH transactions.  Negative feedback doesn't mean shit to them if they're selling 6,300,000 copies in the opening week at ~$60USD per box.

The dollar bills would be earplugs to any feedback that they'd ever recieve because if you're pulling those kind of figures, it's unlikely you want to hear anything else.

Yet it also is the fastest returned game in history.

That and there are multiple law suites going on right now in different countries because of Diablo 3 not to mention the 10+ year development cycle.

Ill tell you right now, they have not broken even at all from Diablo 3.  

Its not a wake up call persay because of the complaints its a wake up call due to the fact that people are quitting the game left and right.

Bash admited to only hundreds of thousands of players online at a time, and the fact that a good portion of the people that bought the game retruned it.  Hell half my friends did it.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Banaghran

This is the whole discussion in a nutshell, you simply cannot fathom something different from the controlled raid or small scale, me (and friends) vs 3 elites, combat.

Just like the devs.

We DO NOT need to have tough elites, we DO NOT need to have tough bosses, they just need to be epic, we DO NOT need gear checks, gear just has to be attractive, we DO NOT need extensive survivability checks, we just need basic rules not a petri-dish environment where everything out of the right pattern is vanquished, we DO NOT need to have a long tough forced progression trough the game to make a rpg fun and a lasting experience.

Well what I was describing was simply good combat design and really has nothing to do with raiding or small-group content (apart from said content being good combat design in the better MMORPGs.)

We absolutely DO need to have tough challenges.  No challenge means there's no game!  (But every player should of course have the option of fighting the challenge which is right for them, and be rewarded accordingly.)

• There's no "epic" without challenge.
• There's no "epic" without survivability checks.
• There is "epic" without gear-checks, but we're talking about RPGs.  RPGs have progression, and gear is one of the most easily-understood forms of progression.

If you want a no-rules, no-challenge, no-RPG entertainment experience, you're going to find it in something like Second Life.  An experience which isn't a game.

There seems to be a much stronger player interest in games with game patterns to unravel than open sandbox experiences like Second Life.

Overall, that is not what i have written, we are talking about very specific forms of combat and challenge, that you see them as generic "good combat design" and essential IS the problem.

If YOU want a limited challenge system and linear gear progression, you can go to wow, it works both ways.

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by Valua

Fastest selling PC game of all time, 9 million copies sold, hundreds of million of dollars made.

 

If anything, expect more like this.

Problem is that they pretty much destroyed their reputation, and reputation of diablo franchise completely. 9 million copies were sold on good will based on previous games. Their next game will not fare so good.

Originally posted by Psychow

Originally posted by zekeofev

I will never buy Blizzard ever again. Period.

 

Good for you! Stick to your guns! Even if they release an AMAZING game that everyone on the planet plays and it's decried the greatest game ever made...don't buy it...you said you wouldn't. Period.

Rofl.... like my wise Dad loves to say.... "Always and Never"

Originally posted by onlinenow25

I don't know what is considered a challenge for you but increased numbers is not a challenge for me.  There is no real challenge in Diablo 3.

Getting 1 shotted off screen by monsters is not a challenge its dumb.  The game is a 100% gear check and is not what the genre or the series of the game stands for.

Also to note that there are people now playing the game to find out the statistics of how bad the item roles are in the game.  At current someone bought 3000 ilvl63 items and out of all of them only had 4 or 5 items that were worth much.  More than half were complete crap, stuff like + gold pick up range, lowered level req etc.  

Some were a step above it but the stats on them were worse than stuff you get in Act 2 normal.  He got a total of maybe 200 items that could be sold on the AH.

You can keep having fun playing the game fine, but you should know especially from designing games that it is hugely flawed and terribly designed.

There is no risk vrs reward.  There is no feeling of accomplishment from playing the game, there is nothing to intice people to play the game.  Its actually scary that you as a supposive game programer can't see this, btw what company do you work for because I really don't want to play any game your working on.

Where in my post did you see me say D3 had exactly the right kinds of challenges?  Because I'm pretty sure I didn't say that.

Calling D3 "100% gear check" conveniently ignores the depth that emerges the times when it does provide an interesting challenge -- when you're at the gear sweet spot for your current mobs so that dodging a berserker swing is necessary and saves your life, or dodging the meteor+knockback of a Morlu caster.  Those are the moments that make D3 not a 100% gear check, and D3 isn't short on them (compared to most MMORPG gameplay it has an awful lot of them, actually.)

You seem to go on a tangent about ilvl63 stuff that doesn't really make much sense (someone intentionally bought non-upgrades and complained about it?)

D3 is about rolling "loot dice", numbered 1-100.  If you roll a better number than your prior best, it's an upgrade!  It should be clear upon thinking of things this way that the majority of rolls definitely aren't going to be upgrades, because the higher your best roll gets the more rolls you need to expect to beat that upgrade.

Enter the AH.  Now you can purchase a "75" roll.  This means you've immediately eliminated 75% of loot as possible upgrades.  (This of course assumes you don't just outright buy a 99 or 100 roll, as some players could afford that.)

So it's pretty dumb to whine about how hard it is to find upgrades once your gear is all "99"s.

As for risk vs. reward, I think my first post in this thread already covered that (although 'challenge vs. reward' is really what games should be about more than risk vs. reward.)  As for "keep having fun playing", I quit D3 once I realize their patch to improve loot drops mathematically encouraged me to keep farming Act 1 inferno forever until I could one-shot Act 2 mobs.

Originally posted by Banaghran

Overall, that is not what i have written, we are talking about very specific forms of combat and challenge, that you see them as generic "good combat design" and essential IS the problem.

If YOU want a limited challenge system and linear gear progression, you can go to wow, it works both ways.

Speak plainly and come out with your point.

Are you really suggesting we don't need challenge?  Because without challenge, there's no game.  WOW has nothing to do with it, this is true of any game (which is why D3's specific form of combat also doesn't matter.)

Very little about D3's loot is "linear progression" (see "loot dice" example from above post)

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by laserit

Well I guess I'm just looking at the bigger picture.

Here we have the most popular gaming company implementing a P2W RMAH into their RPG. If you are buying gear to complete inferno it is by definition P2W. What happens when the PVP enters the game? how is this not a threat to game integrity?

Guess I'm just behind the times. Games to me, be it board games, video games, D&D were always about just having fun. It didnt matter how much money you had to blow, We left that for the casino.

If Blizz consider's it successful, I'd put money on them introducing it into WoW and Titan. Once its accepted by the consumer's the other gaming companies will follow suit.

Nah I see this type of thing as a threat to the integrity of gaming period, even if it dosnt effect me personally. It's just a downhill slope. 

They've implemented a system I can choose to completely ignore without problems.

If someone implements a system I can't ignore, I'll avoid that game.

Games to me have always just been about fun.  That's why I can enjoy D3 (without RMAHing).  But you can't; because games to you I guess aren't just about having fun.

I could say the same thing about some asian grinders. If I can grind and eventually get the best gear that way instead of buying it in a CS I dont have to use the CS. If I think the grind is fun anyway there is no problem.... But if I think grinding is boring there is a problem. And in that case I will have to pay or quit. Because I play games to have fun...

If a system like that or like in D3 is OK or not is subjective. We can never decide or know what other people will think is fun or boring. Obviously some players dont like the RMAH in D3. They also play games to have fun and the RMAH ruins the game for them. Its up to them. If they feel that way it makes sense to find some other game they can enjoy.

Originally posted by laokoko

It's a wake up call your not a kid any more.  All those great game you play as a kid are great because there's nothing before it.

 

I've played games as 7 year old kid on C64, then as 10 y old kid on Amiga. 

Then some games on PC starting at 13 + years old.

I also had access to some game consoles in my friend's houses.

So no your arguments are invalid - I had many games played and 6 years of gaming experience before I played PC games from 1996 - 2005 which I consider time when best games did release and I compare games from that peroid to new games.

It is not just rose tainted glasses since I replay some games from that peroid every now and then in today's times.

Originally posted by Hurvart

I could say the same thing about some asian grinders. If I can grind and eventually get the best gear that way instead of buying it in a CS I dont have to use the CS. If I think the grind is fun anyway there is no problem.... But if I think grinding is boring there is a problem. And in that case I will have to pay or quit. Because I play games to have fun...

If a system like that or like in D3 is OK or not is subjective. We can never decide or know what other people will think is fun or boring. Obviously some players dont like the RMAH in D3. They also play games to have fun and the RMAH ruins the game for them. Its up to them. If they feel that way it makes sense to find some other game they can enjoy.

It doesn't matter whether they think it's fun or boring.

With a grind, you cannot avoid it.

With RMAH, you can avoid it.  Completely.  Without penalty.

You could completely hate the RMAH or (like me) simply have zero interest in ruining your fun with it, and decide not to use it, and not have a worse experience as a result (in fact my experience is far better than it would've been if I'd bought/sold RMAH gear.)

If the critique was aimed at the AH in general, I could understand it better because (a) killing mobs and finding an upgrade is fun, (b) the AH interface isn't fun, and (c) using the AH massively reduces the upgrades I'll end up getting from mobs.

Some other game designer in the Blizzard official forums pointed that out (paraphrased: "Games should drive players to their most fun features, but D3 drives you to the AH.") and it was a fantastic point.

Originally posted by Lobotomist

Problem is that they pretty much destroyed their reputation, and reputation of diablo franchise completely. 9 million copies were sold on good will based on previous games. Their next game will not fare so good.

Next expansion release not all that far away; and then all will be forgiven.

Why doesn't the public evaluate new things on a per-case (instead of a per-reputation) basis?  We know from decades of bitter experience that a company/studios last effort is an extraordinarily poor predictor of their next effort.

Marketing works too well, particularly on those who believe themselves immune to it.

Originally posted by onlinenow25

Originally posted by uohaloran

I'm sure I'm echoing the sentiments of what has already been posted in here, at least I hope I am...

The game sold tremendously well and Blizzard is surely doing pretty good with their cuts from the RMAH transactions.  Negative feedback doesn't mean shit to them if they're selling 6,300,000 copies in the opening week at ~$60USD per box.

The dollar bills would be earplugs to any feedback that they'd ever recieve because if you're pulling those kind of figures, it's unlikely you want to hear anything else.

Yet it also is the fastest returned game in history.

That and there are multiple law suites going on right now in different countries because of Diablo 3 not to mention the 10+ year development cycle.

Ill tell you right now, they have not broken even at all from Diablo 3.  

Its not a wake up call persay because of the complaints its a wake up call due to the fact that people are quitting the game left and right.

Bash admited to only hundreds of thousands of players online at a time, and the fact that a good portion of the people that bought the game retruned it.  Hell half my friends did it.

Fastest game returned in history? Multiple Law suits from different companies? Haven't broken even from Diablo 3? People quitting left and right? And bash admitting to people returning the game?

Yeah please allow me to inform you that you are more than welcome to come back to reality. Were do you get your facts from? Random people in some chat room that are also spreading these rumors? This stuff just makes me laugh. Someone just randomly shooting out rumors like there facts then beleiving in them like there true.

Fact, there is A law suit going on in EU for Diablo 3. Fact, people are slowiy not logging into Diablo but theres still a good portion playing, just not as much. Fact, it is not that fastest returned game in history, theres another game that has that title and I doubt they will ever lose it. Fact, no one knows what they have made off Diablo 3 if anything. They have yet to release any numbers except for first week sales. And Bash never admitted to anything, if he did please inform all of us by providing a link to this admission which I'm sure you cant find at this exact moment, right? Please just stop, I'm sure people get it, you do not like Diablo 3.

First off, in my opinion, Diablo 3 is a decent game. It keeps me entertained for the time I play it and I can play with my friends. I don't make my hobbies a chore, which some of you seem to do. I just enjoy having fun in a game. I have a level 60 DH on Inferno Act 3 and a level 54 Monk on Hell Act 3. Is it what I expected it should be after playing Diablo 2, nope. Does that bother me, nope. Why? Because its a different team, and a different vision. Whats so wrong with that. I don't want to play a Daiblo 2 with modern graphics and fresher systems. If i did, I would just go by Diablo 2 and hack up a mod. I paid my money to play a new game, with new systems and a new vision. And I got it. Some of you are just sitting to far into the past and won't let go. Games and play styles change and evolve. So do the companies that deliver these things, If they just kept pumping out old visions and concepts, gaming would be a stagnant money maker and developers would move on. So, there you have it my opinion. Like it or hate it, its mine, not yours.

Originally posted by Hurvart

I think future Blizzard games will be very mainstream and bland and they will try hard not to offend anyone. They will certainly be good from a business POV.

No. I think they take risks. RMAH is a huge risk and they know it.

Personally, i like it. Real money won't devalue like gold.

And the game is really fun. Good combat system. Good production values.

Originally posted by Axehilt

If the critique was aimed at the AH in general, I could understand it better because (a) killing mobs and finding an upgrade is fun, (b) the AH interface isn't fun, and (c) using the AH massively reduces the upgrades I'll end up getting from mobs.

 

Personally that critique is not valid to me. Because

a) killing mobs and find a valuable item is fun ... it is much more frustrating to get a perfect DH item while i am running a wiz (and no i don't have multiple 60s to use all the good stuff i get),

b) i agree .. we need more filters on AH. It needs to be done better ... better yet, it should be on the web.

c) Yeah, but it is fun to find a good deal (and good upgrades) on the AH

Originally posted by zekeofev

I will never buy Blizzard ever again. Period.

You have something against Dairy Queen?

I think those that think there is overwhelmingly negative on Diablo 3 feedback are too biased. I saw the OP's link to the D3 forums, I followed it... 26 page long thread. Versus... Blizzards attempt to reach out to the community to see how they can fix various gameplay annoyances (MF gear swap) is currently over 900 pages long. So as far as a community base goes 26 page thread is <10% of those active in the Blizzard community. So if 5% of the people who like your game hate it? You're doing pretty damn awesome, thats 95% positive.

I think those unhappy with the game is a very loud minority, so was it a wake up call? Nope not a chance. Overwhelmingly the response to the game has been positive. I feel bad that you did not buy the game based on negative feedback on forums such as these. I have not seen a single game released ever that has not gotten slammed by threads on these boards.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Personally that critique is not valid to me. Because

a) killing mobs and find a valuable item is fun ... it is much more frustrating to get a perfect DH item while i am running a wiz (and no i don't have multiple 60s to use all the good stuff i get),

b) i agree .. we need more filters on AH. It needs to be done better ... better yet, it should be on the web.

c) Yeah, but it is fun to find a good deal (and good upgrades) on the AH 

Some other games have already solved (A) by simply not letting gear drop which isn't for your class.  (Which you could clearly expand in a multiplayer game to have extra things drop so you can have that little bit of mid-game trading fun.)

Filters don't solve (B).  We're comparing a UI vs. a game.  The AH UI is never going to be as fun as playing Diablo's combat.  Yet the game forces you to interact with it a lot.  It's sub-optimal design.  Please recall how many WOW upgrades you received in (1) fun gameplay vs. (2) AH UI.  They hit the mix right in that game, where very few upgrades came from the AH.  The tragedy is that these two games (WOW and D3) come from the same company.

(C) It's not that fun to find a good deal.  Certainly not as fun as playing the game itself.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Banaghran

Overall, that is not what i have written, we are talking about very specific forms of combat and challenge, that you see them as generic "good combat design" and essential IS the problem.

If YOU want a limited challenge system and linear gear progression, you can go to wow, it works both ways.

Speak plainly and come out with your point.

Are you really suggesting we don't need challenge?  Because without challenge, there's no game.  WOW has nothing to do with it, this is true of any game (which is why D3's specific form of combat also doesn't matter.)

Very little about D3's loot is "linear progression" (see "loot dice" example from above post)

I already did, you have just chosen what to attack, luckily it was not my point :)

There are different forms of challenge and combat, just because we have this kind of challenge in d3 (small groups of mobs more powerful  than your character to the point that occasionally they have more skills numerically than your character) does not mean it is the only way just because it IS a form of challenge and combat. Similar survivability, is it really important to basically force defensive stuff on the player, because he will be unable to kill anything, instead of secondary considerations (exp loss, gold loss, or simply making the fight more enjoyable) being the main drive to be more durable?

As for linear progression, it is random linear progression if you want :), a lv 40 item will in general not have the same amount of a stat as a lv 60 item because the chance to get 75% of a possible stat is roughly the same in the grand scale of things (due to spreads having increased minimums, too), outside of considering a excellent lv 40 item vs a very bad lv 60 item. It is very visible on stuff like crit chance, at lv 40 you get 3-3.5%, at lv 60 you get 5-6.5%, that makes the item hunt on alts extremely unfun, in reality you have no chance to find anything useful for your main and due to the randomness even for the alt before you hit lv 60. Wow works the same way, except for the randomness, this being a point of many discussions "if the mobs are as hard as heroic/raid bosses, shouldnt they drop the same guaranteed good (if not always usefull for anyone) loot?".

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by Banaghran

I already did, you have just chosen what to attack, luckily it was not my point :)

There are different forms of challenge and combat, just because we have this kind of challenge in d3 (small groups of mobs more powerful  than your character to the point that occasionally they have more skills numerically than your character) does not mean it is the only way just because it IS a form of challenge and combat. Similar survivability, is it really important to basically force defensive stuff on the player, because he will be unable to kill anything, instead of secondary considerations (exp loss, gold loss, or simply making the fight more enjoyable) being the main drive to be more durable?

As for linear progression, it is random linear progression if you want :), a lv 40 item will in general not have the same amount of a stat as a lv 60 item because the chance to get 75% of a possible stat is roughly the same in the grand scale of things (due to spreads having increased minimums, too), outside of considering a excellent lv 40 item vs a very bad lv 60 item. It is very visible on stuff like crit chance, at lv 40 you get 3-3.5%, at lv 60 you get 5-6.5%, that makes the item hunt on alts extremely unfun, in reality you have no chance to find anything useful for your main and due to the randomness even for the alt before you hit lv 60. Wow works the same way, except for the randomness, this being a point of many discussions "if the mobs are as hard as heroic/raid bosses, shouldnt they drop the same guaranteed good (if not always usefull for anyone) loot?". 

I guess I don't remember where anyone said only one specific type of challenge matters.  When I say challenge I mean all challenge (or rather: all enjoyable challenge.)

Survivability is one such challenge and there's nothing wrong with the way it's implemented in D3 apart from its value raising a bit abruptly in relation to other stats.

But you basically walked through the list of every single way D3 offers challenge and implied "we don't need this", when in fact all of those challenges are why D3 is at least as fun as it is.

Are you suggesting D3 should've been a completely different game?  What's the point of that?  These types of games work and are tons of fun when balanced correctly.

Seems to me that the people that are complaining should consider Hell difficulty their end game and leave Inferno for those who actually enjoy the game.

Hell mode is still challenging if you don't cheese it and buy Inferno gear off the AH. The best part of the game is "finally" getting those sweet drops. You'll probably never get the perfect drop, but if you haven't upgraded everything via the AH then you'll get plenty of upgrades from drops.

I really question whether those that complain about thegame really like these hack-n-slash dungeon crawlers. People say thinks like "I don't like repetition" when that's what these games are! Not just D3 but Torchlight and all the other Diablo clones.

(Hopefully this post was nice enough so I don't get another warning...)

Originally posted by Axehilt

But you basically walked through the list of every single way D3 offers challenge and implied "we don't need this", when in fact all of those challenges are why D3 is at least as fun as it is.

Are you suggesting D3 should've been a completely different game?  What's the point of that?  These types of games work and are tons of fun when balanced correctly.

"These types of games", which ones, name another two which have the features we are arguing about. 

You are again escaping into generics, because a <random lemon> is a car does not mean it is a good car just because you think cars are good things.

The meaning of arpg or diablo clone or diablo series does not magically change once they release another game.

"Fun as it is", it could have been MORE fun, especially since the past games WERE more fun, while you got your month for 60 bucks it does not mean it is ok, for a game of a very successful series, from a very successful developer.

In essence i am saying, that in my opinion the game offers the wrong challenge the wrong way, that the problem is deeper than just tweaking some numbers as you suggest, and you can agree or disagree.

Flame on!

:)