Diablo III: Not Just a Vitality Race!

[Starwulf]

Sorry you feel that way.


You'll be interested to note though that the video starts off from your position - namely, predicting that Blizzard will lose a substantial chunk of revenue by limiting the game to online-only. (How do you plan on playing it with a connection like that anyway? )

They just go on to make the very valid point that the projected revenue from a RMM will dwarf what they lose.

I played Diablo 2 just fine, only the occasional lag spike here and there. I imagine I'll be just fine with D3 as well. though that is one of my other irritations with Blizzard and D3, the lack of Single player, but that topic has been beaten more then a dead horse has.

I'm not sure going that far is wise. After all, because they're having a real money store, it will be much easier to have continued support for the game. That's not to say it has my support, but making such a black and white view can be unwise.

Unsurprisingly, a lot of my views in life are pretty black and white. I don't find much room for middle-ground except in a few areas.

[Psyren]

I played Diablo 2 just fine, only the occasional lag spike here and there. I imagine I'll be just fine with D3 as well. though that is one of my other irritations with Blizzard and D3, the lack of Single player, but that topic has been beaten more then a dead horse has.

Not saying you're wrong exactly, but I'm not sure a 10-year old game is a good benchmark to rely on.

And D3 does have single player, you just have to be connected to play it.

[Starwulf]

Not saying you're wrong exactly, but I'm not sure a 10-year old game is a good benchmark to rely on.

And D3 does have single player, you just have to be connected to play it.

Shouldn't have TOO much issue playing it online. The roughest part will be playing with other people, and even that won't be as bad as it was in D2, since only 4 people are going to be in a game at a time. Connection should communicate with their servers the same as it did before, better even, since they made the change that you only see what drops for you, which should put a small limit on the amount of gold and items that will litter the ground as compared to D2, which was probably one of the biggest sources of lag. Better still since they are upgrading their servers and switching over to B.net 2.0 or whatever in the near future. Over-all, all of those things should add-up to a decent experience playing D3 online, so I'm not overly concerned where that's concerned.

[ZeltArruin]

Unsurprisingly, a lot of my views in life are pretty black and white. I don't find much room for middle-ground except in a few areas.

That's a very strange way to look at the world, Zelgadis, rarely is anything black or white, but that is a conversation/debate/rant/etc for another place.

On the auction house business, I am all for giving game companies more money, that's why I buy games, dlc, pointless cosmetics things like skins, and so on, so they can make more and better games for me.

[Psyren]

On the auction house business, I am all for giving game companies more money, that's why I buy games, dlc, pointless cosmetics things like skins, and so on, so they can make more and better games for me.

It's even better than that - YOU have a chance to make money! Play the RMAH well enough and the game might pay for itself. It's gonna be a wild ride.

[Karoht]

@Karoht: Wow, that crafting system sounds amazing and quite fun :) Looking forward to being able to check it out in-game once it's released ^^. Thanks for the info, if they introduce the other two crafting methods in the beta, please be sure to post up info for them as well if you don't mind.

Actually, they just released the other two hireling types today on the website. The Scoundrel and the Enchantress. Scoundrel isn't my cup of tea beyond the appearance and likely awesome quotes, Enchantress starts with Charm and can basically control various critters which just sounds rad, and the Templar is still as awesome sounding as he has been in Beta.
Plus, these aren't faceless characters either. All 3 have a name, a back story, etc.
I'm actually wondering if you can have all 3 running around at the same time or not, but I'm pretty sure you are limited to one active at a time. And at the moment, Hirelings are not active once you have another player in the same game as you, so they really are there for just the single play.

I'm not going to beat the dead horse of RMAH and the requirement of constant internet connection either. We've had that discussion already, you and I.

That said, the lack of LAN didn't kill SCII, it likely won't affect D3 all that much either.
There is also the fact that Blizzard isn't selling power. Or convenience. Because Blizzard isn't doing the selling. The players are. Just like they did with Diablo 2 over ebay with items, gold, and characters, only now it's in game rather than out of game.

Better still since they are upgrading their servers and switching over to B.net 2.0 or whatever in the near future.

Battle.net 2.0 happened a few years ago. Granted, this is only the initial phases of the Battle.net 2.0 plan, but the conversion has already taken place.

[Psyren]

And at the moment, Hirelings are not active once you have another player in the same game as you, so they really are there for just the single play.

You mean all those "duel my merc" asshats will have to find a new way to stroke their e-peen? Oh noes

[Karoht]

You mean all those "duel my merc" asshats will have to find a new way to stroke their e-peen? Oh noes

I highly doubt Hirelings will be in PvP. The focus seems to be in keeping them a partial story element for single play. And given the awesome banter of the Templar, I have extremely high hopes for the Scoundrel and Enchantress.

I haven't personally experienced PvP, but the old model of flagging hostile griefing is dead from what I hear.

[Starwulf]

Actually, they just released the other two hireling types today on the website. The Scoundrel and the Enchantress. Scoundrel isn't my cup of tea beyond the appearance and likely awesome quotes, Enchantress starts with Charm and can basically control various critters which just sounds rad, and the Templar is still as awesome sounding as he has been in Beta.
Plus, these aren't faceless characters either. All 3 have a name, a back story, etc.
I'm actually wondering if you can have all 3 running around at the same time or not, but I'm pretty sure you are limited to one active at a time. And at the moment, Hirelings are not active once you have another player in the same game as you, so they really are there for just the single play.

I'm not going to beat the dead horse of RMAH and the requirement of constant internet connection either. We've had that discussion already, you and I.

That said, the lack of LAN didn't kill SCII, it likely won't affect D3 all that much either.
There is also the fact that Blizzard isn't selling power. Or convenience. Because Blizzard isn't doing the selling. The players are. Just like they did with Diablo 2 over ebay with items, gold, and characters, only now it's in game rather than out of game.


Battle.net 2.0 happened a few years ago. Granted, this is only the initial phases of the Battle.net 2.0 plan, but the conversion has already taken place.

Really? I thought 2.0 was still in the testing phase. That's cool to hear though. have they switched D2 and WC3 and stuff over to it as well, or is it still on the old version?

Awesome to hear about the mercs, glad they aren't going to be just another faceless mook whom you get just for progressing so far in a particular act. I just hope they all have their uses in various situations, unlike in D2, where you only picked the Act 2 merc, and went with Holy Freeze aura(usually).

Actually, a question about the mercs: If you can only have one active at a time, when you switch to another, will the previous one retain it's levels? That MIGHT have encouraged the use of a few other mercs in specific situations in D2, but since they didn't, you stuck with one merc only, because who wants to grind a merc to level 90+, only to have to re-do it over because you went with another merc for a single situation where it was more useful then your regular.

[Karoht]

Really? I thought 2.0 was still in the testing phase. That's cool to hear though. have they switched D2 and WC3 and stuff over to it as well, or is it still on the old version?

The old games are still supported by the old Bnet still in place. It exists just for those games.
Head to www.battle.net if you want more info on the whole thing. You can still manage those games via the new battle.net, but in-game access to battle.net is completely unchanged.

Awesome to hear about the mercs, glad they aren't going to be just another faceless mook whom you get just for progressing so far in a particular act. I just hope they all have their uses in various situations, unlike in D2, where you only picked the Act 2 merc, and went with Holy Freeze aura(usually).

Templar tanks and heals, Enchantress is some CC and blasty-ness, Scoundrel is long range damage and some support, most of which is more utility oriented.

Actually, a question about the mercs: If you can only have one active at a time, when you switch to another, will the previous one retain it's levels? That MIGHT have encouraged the use of a few other mercs in specific situations in D2, but since they didn't, you stuck with one merc only, because who wants to grind a merc to level 90+, only to have to re-do it over because you went with another merc for a single situation where it was more useful then your regular.

If you're asking what I think your asking...
I believe they individually retain their own progression. So you might have a level 23 Templar, a 34 Scoundrel and a 12 Enchantress. Though I have absolutely no idea if their starting levels are fixed or not. Since you first encounter the Templar in the dungeon and recruit him at that point, it stands to reason that you would recruit the other two in much the same fashion, though I have no idea what happens when you have hireling A active and get to the story point where hireling B is recruited.
Oh yeah, and you 'spec' your hirelings. You have 8 abilities to chose from, pick four. There are 2 choices every 5 levels or so up to level 20, you pick one ability or the other. No, the choices are not perminent as far as I can tell.

Neat function of the hireling is that if you die but your hireling is still alive, the hireling can and will rez you once out of combat.

[Starwulf]

The old games are still supported by the old Bnet still in place. It exists just for those games.
Head to www.battle.net if you want more info on the whole thing. You can still manage those games via the new battle.net, but in-game access to battle.net is completely unchanged.


Templar tanks and heals, Enchantress is some CC and blasty-ness, Scoundrel is long range damage and some support, most of which is more utility oriented.


If you're asking what I think your asking...
I believe they individually retain their own progression. So you might have a level 23 Templar, a 34 Scoundrel and a 12 Enchantress. Though I have absolutely no idea if their starting levels are fixed or not. Since you first encounter the Templar in the dungeon and recruit him at that point, it stands to reason that you would recruit the other two in much the same fashion, though I have no idea what happens when you have hireling A active and get to the story point where hireling B is recruited.
Oh yeah, and you 'spec' your hirelings. You have 8 abilities to chose from, pick four. There are 2 choices every 5 levels or so up to level 20, you pick one ability or the other. No, the choices are not perminent as far as I can tell.

Neat function of the hireling is that if you die but your hireling is still alive, the hireling can and will rez you once out of combat.

Well, hopefully they will retain their progression when you switch from one to another. Having to re-level every time you switch would get old really fast, and really shouldn't be happening since they obviously aren't just faceless mooks this time around, but actual NPCs with their own background and story attached to them.

Wow, you can directly control the abilities they get? Hell yeah! Getting more and more stoked for D3 the more you talk! :) LOL.

[Karoht]

Wow, you can directly control the abilities they get? Hell yeah! Getting more and more stoked for D3 the more you talk! :) LOL.

Templar
At 5-A heal or a taunt
At 10-A healing aura or a minor CC (Intimidate)
At 15-Charge attack with single target stun or an AoE stun
At 20-An aura that buffs all your resource systems (Mana, Arcane Power, Fury, Spirit, Discipline/Hatred) and... not sure what the other thing was but it can't be that important. I think it was an accuracy aura.
And as far as I can tell, it all scales with level and gear.

I don't think identical aura's stack. I think the most powerful one of two identical auras overrides.


The Scoundrel is more pew pew/avoid stuff, the Enchantress is more CC/Blasty.

[Psyren]

Neat function of the hireling is that if you die but your hireling is still alive, the hireling can and will rez you once out of combat.

"out of combat?" don't tell me they're segregating those two states.

In D2, you were "in combat" the moment you left town. They're not doing stuff like potion/TP lockouts during a fight, are they?


Also; what happens when you die without a merc? Same corpse run?

[Karoht]

"out of combat?" don't tell me they're segregating those two states.

Out of Combat meaning "when he's done stabbing things or being stabbed himself"

Also; what happens when you die without a merc? Same corpse run?

You start back in town with all of your gear, I don't think you lose any gold, I'm 100% positive you don't lose experience. In fact, other than the inconvenience of being kicked all the way back to town, I don't think there is actually a negative for dying.

[Psyren]

Out of Combat meaning "when he's done stabbing things or being stabbed himself"

Still a tad doubtful... his chances of survival sound much better if he'd rez me right away, unless the odds are truly overwhelming, in which case he's dead anyway.

You start back in town with all of your gear, I don't think you lose any gold, I'm 100% positive you don't lose experience. In fact, other than the inconvenience of being kicked all the way back to town, I don't think there is actually a negative for dying.

Are there waypoints again? For when you're tossed back out of the wilderness and need to get back to where you were, I mean.

And does that mean people will once again be sitting on their thumbs in town for "TP to Durance 2"?

[Karoht]

Still a tad doubtful... his chances of survival sound much better if he'd rez me right away, unless the odds are truly overwhelming, in which case he's dead anyway.

You try and convince him.
Also, you can res allies in combat, you just have to manage to reach their body and complete a casting, I think it's 5 seconds. I managed to pull it off with enemies still up, but that was with some fun 'ring around the obstacle' shenanigans.
I think there is a limited amount of time to get to the body and res, I could be wrong.

Are there waypoints again? For when you're tossed back out of the wilderness and need to get back to where you were, I mean.

Yes. You only use 2 or 3 in the beta, but they work identically to D2.

And does that mean people will once again be sitting on their thumbs in town for "TP to Durance 2"?

I can't imagine why someone would. Maybe I don't understand the question?

[Psyren]

I can't imagine why someone would. Maybe I don't understand the question?

Nightmare Act 1

xxZonSlayerxx has joined the game. Baal's minions grow stronger.
lalaPala has joined the game. Baal's minions grow stronger.
Barbiebarb has joined the game. Baal's minions grow stronger.
OMGFIRE has joined the game. Baal's minions grow stronger.
KickSiNz has joined the game. Baal's minions grow stronger.

Barbiebarb: sorc can u tele 2 Stony
OMGFIRE: no
Barbiebarb: tele or we leave
OMGFIRE: kk

*rest of party waits in town*

OMGFIRE was slain by Rakanishu
xxZonSlayerxx has left the game. Baal's minions weaken.
lalaPala has left the game. Baal's minions weaken.
Barbiebarb has left the game. Baal's minions weaken.
KickSiNz has left the game. Baal's minions weaken.

OMGFIRE:....
OMGFIRE has left the game. Baal's minions weaken.

[Karoht]

Nightmare Act 1
~snip~

Okay. Whoop de do? Sorry but when people threaten to do anything like leave the game (OMG not thaaaat) I more or less leave them to their own devices. That and I would tell them to stop being lazy and use the waypoint.

Remember, most people are probably going to play as invite only or friends only. In a public game that might happen. In an invite/friends only game, if people are threatening to leave if I don't do X, odds are I'm going to log out before they do, then re-open my own private game and just not invite them.

[Psyren]

You asked for an illustration of behavior in public games and I gave one to you. I didn't say I agreed with it myself.

I highly doubt that "most people" will play private, friends-only games - especially not initially, before many of the players have made those friends to begin with.

Now, D2 was designed to keep asshats around (remember - the more players that were in a room, the better the loot). My hope is that D3 changed that, but even if it did you're going to have a lot of D2 players that were used to the status quo of being lazy; not to mention, we're going right back to early D2 days when only one class could teleport and thus was expected to do all the waypoint running.

[Avilan the Grey]

I highly doubt that "most people" will play private, friends-only games - especially not initially, before many of the players have made those friends to begin with.

Actually I think the opposite. Most people online today has friends or "friends" (used here in a positive way; people you only meet online and not knows the real name of, but still considers familiar and trustworthy, such as the people on this forum are to me) and have no problem finding 4 of them to play a game with.

Personally I am a solo player by heart, though, and will most likely play 90-95% of my games as the only player.

[Karoht]

You asked for an illustration of behavior in public games and I gave one to you. I didn't say I agreed with it myself.

Sorry, I was snappy, early morning, out of coffee.

I highly doubt that "most people" will play private, friends-only games - especially not initially, before many of the players have made those friends to begin with.

Fair enough. Since the game makes use of battle.net, your battle.net friends are all visable and message-able (and invite-able if they are also playing D3) as well as for the first few playthroughs, people will probably want to experience the story alone, which an invite-only or friends-only game is perfect for. I think the description for invite-only mode even hints at this. I think it also defaults to invite-only, there are people in the beta who had to be informed that there were in fact other modes of play, so some players might never change that setting.

Now, D2 was designed to keep asshats around (remember - the more players that were in a room, the better the loot). My hope is that D3 changed that, but even if it did you're going to have a lot of D2 players that were used to the status quo of being lazy; not to mention, we're going right back to early D2 days when only one class could teleport and thus was expected to do all the waypoint running.

Meh. Hopefully players won't be silly and enable the lazy. Oh wait.
I don't know if what you suggest is likely to be an issue.


/facepalm
I'm an idiot. No really.

Okay, if someone joins your game, they start in town. In town next to the waypoint will be some banners. A banner representing each player (yes, you can customize these from day 1), all you do is click the banner and you go right to where ever the player in question is.

Now I don't know how well that will work past Act 1. I will assume that if you are in act 2 and the other player is in act 1 that they will still have to clear act 1 first, for example, before they can click your banner. At least I hope it works that way, otherwise I can imagine poor lowbies going to act 3 or 4 before they're time and dying a lot.

Yes I'm an idiot, I totally forgot about the banner thing.

[Meta]

Playing with random people yields random results. Play with people you know you enjoy for results you know you'll enjoy.

[Diarmuid]

But there will still be plenty of people just looking to get to max PC's in a game for better drops to farm for the RMAH and they wont care who joins that game.

Sure, if their friends are available they're likely to play with them, but when their friends are offline they'll still want to be pulling down 4PC loots as opposed to Solo loots (assuming loot is better with more players).

[Karoht]

But there will still be plenty of people just looking to get to max PC's in a game for better drops to farm for the RMAH and they wont care who joins that game.

If they don't care who enters the game with them, then they won't care if those people complain about needing fast transport to a place.

Sure, if their friends are available they're likely to play with them, but when their friends are offline they'll still want to be pulling down 4PC loots as opposed to Solo loots (assuming loot is better with more players).

Sadly I don't have any kind of confirm regarding loot and player number, but I can confirm that XP is better. For some people, that alone is enough.

There was an article on how loot would work in Inferno mode, but I'll be darned if I paid very much attention to it. Luck based loot is luck based loot, usually with my luck it takes a pretty big uptick in drop rate for me to even see the upgrade I'm looking for. Which is why I am again very happy that stuff that drops for you is invisible to other people.

[Psyren]

Playing with random people yields random results. Play with people you know you enjoy for results you know you'll enjoy.

Brilliant, Holmes!
But as I said before, people didn't play pubs and randoms in D2 because they wanted to, they did it for the loot. And even if you have a large coterie of friends to call on, there's going to be a time when some or all of them aren't available to play with you.

(In other words, what Darmuid said.)

[Karoht]

Brilliant, Holmes!
But as I said before, people didn't play pubs and randoms in D2 because they wanted to, they did it for the loot. And even if you have a large coterie of friends to call on, there's going to be a time when some or all of them aren't available to play with you.
(In other words, what Darmuid said.)

That does bring up an interesting point.
D2 encouraged grouping with improved stuff (xp and loot).

If D3 doesn't have improved loot, and for sake of discussion, we'll remove improved xp as well, how does it encourage grouping? How could it potentially encourage grouping?

I like the idea that in D3 it might not be required for the best drop chance, making grouping a completely optional decision for the players. That assumes drop chance is fixed regardless of the number of players, mind you, to which I have no information on at this time. I do know that Inferno difficulty is solo-able, but that could just be solo-able for extremely dedicated/skilled players or somesuch. Grouping Inferno might still be optional, might not be due to difficulty. Hard to say.

[Starwulf]

That does bring up an interesting point.
D2 encouraged grouping with improved stuff (xp and loot).

If D3 doesn't have improved loot, and for sake of discussion, we'll remove improved xp as well, how does it encourage grouping? How could it potentially encourage grouping?

I like the idea that in D3 it might not be required for the best drop chance, making grouping a completely optional decision for the players. That assumes drop chance is fixed regardless of the number of players, mind you, to which I have no information on at this time. I do know that Inferno difficulty is solo-able, but that could just be solo-able for extremely dedicated/skilled players or somesuch. Grouping Inferno might still be optional, might not be due to difficulty. Hard to say.

Hmm, wasn't it in that one interview a while back(where they were being extremely arrogant) that they basically said if you're playing Diablo in single-player, you're doing it wrong? So I'm sure there will be a reason to group, and it likely will be improved EXP and loot, can't imagine there is any other decent motivation to get people to work together, unless they really do institute "raid" bosses, which would suck ><

[Diarmuid]

Did Bioware actually say that, or are you just referring to someone's opinion? I've heard plenty of people say playing D1/D2 solo was "wrong" but that has as much oomph behind it as me saying that grinding out the same encounter over and over is "wrong".

[Starwulf]

Did Bioware actually say that, or are you just referring to someone's opinion? I've heard plenty of people say playing D1/D2 solo was "wrong" but that has as much oomph behind it as me saying that grinding out the same encounter over and over is "wrong".

It was in an interview that was linked to in another thread, though I am pretty sure that I linked to it in this thread a page or three back ^^ Not sure who the interview was with, but they were talking about how "everyone had access to high-speed internet, and blah blah blah, if you're playing Diablo in single-player, you're playing it wrong, it's not how it's meant to be played, blah blah blah".

[Diarmuid]

Ok, ya I've seen that one linked around. I dont take that as "This is the official stance of Bioware" as much as "This is the opinion of a single Bioware employee" so I'm not going to worry overly much just yet.