Diablo III

[Nixl]

If Blizzard balanced the spells and the items better in D2 than there would have been an amazing amount of customization. Synergies were a band aid fix to the plethora of skills that that became junk spells once you got to a better tier spell (not like it worked though). Even then, synergies did not solve much, because you just spent points on junk spells just to strengthen 1 spell. Putting 20 into poison dagger and 20 into poison explosion just to use Poison Nova was not exactly exciting.

If I had a friend or family member that tried to play a fully cursemancer I would probably have had to kill them out of mercy.

[ZGoten]

The picture you posted is definately promising, jedinat, but it remains to be seen, how different the individual versions of each skill truly are.

Look guys, you know more about Diablo III than I do. If you say that it beats D2 in customization, that's fine, because I want to be excited about the game. It's just that right now, I'm not convinced the new system will work that well. I will keep an eye out for first reviews and player reports though.

[jedinat]

Originally Posted by ZGoten

The picture you posted is definately promising, jedinat, but it remains to be seen, how different the individual versions of each skill truly are.

Look guys, you know more about Diablo III than I do. If you say that it beats D2 in customization, that's fine, because I want to be excited about the game. It's just that right now, I'm not convinced the new system will work that well. I will keep an eye out for first reviews and player reports though.

If you've got some time on your hands:
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/3811455085

[Nixl]

I think the issue D3 system will face two issues.

The first is the potential conflict between "play as you want" versus using the right skill at the right time.

The second is gear dependence. In D2 you had attributes and damage deriving from skill ups, but in D3 both those avenues of optimization are gone and placed solely on gear. Most if not all skills derive damage % from your weapon. Furthermore, without the ability to dump the majority of your stats into vitality, one will probably have to look towards gems and socketed armor to fill int he gap.

In that respect, it makes RMAH that much more prominent.

[Flying Dagger]

The RMAH has a rather high tax rate. I might seek alternatives like d2jsp.

On the other hand, I can just do all my gear farming on a single toon.

[Duo Maxwell]

Originally Posted by Nixl

In that respect, it makes RMAH that much more prominent.

Or just selling thing for gold to craft gears.
Crafted gears have higher stats than most drop in the game.

I don't think I'll ever have a chance to touch RMAH, seeing there are roughly 11 of my friends who's going to play D3. It means most of my found gears will be traded shared among us.

[aohige]

We could try and convince someone who doens't like a game otherwise, but I have NEVER seen such arguments actually accomplish anything.

You don't like it, you don't have to play it. There are plenty of other games around, and your opinion is never wrong, it's just yours. And there are plenty of times when an opinion of a game changes much later, and you decide to pick it up.

Besides, knowing Blizzard, the game will probably be completely different entity a year from now.

[felix]

Mathematics based build systems = mathematically there is only 1 answer = the illusion of customization.

D3 fixes it, or tries to.

[ZGoten]

That doesn't make sense at all. Just the fact alone that Diablo 2 may have only had few "viable" option doesn't mean that it can't be different.

[aohige]

D3 has countless flexible "viable" options. D2 basically only had few viable options per class, and everything else was less than optimal. Not only that, but D3's options are interchangable at any time.

That's why you actually have more choices.

It's quite obvious this is getting repeated over and over without sticking.
It makes sense. You just don't get it.

Originally Posted by Nixl

I think the issue D3 system will face two issues.

The first is the potential conflict between "play as you want" versus using the right skill at the right time.

The second is gear dependence. In D2 you had attributes and damage deriving from skill ups, but in D3 both those avenues of optimization are gone and placed solely on gear. Most if not all skills derive damage % from your weapon. Furthermore, without the ability to dump the majority of your stats into vitality, one will probably have to look towards gems and socketed armor to fill int he gap.

In that respect, it makes RMAH that much more prominent.

On the other hand, it also means that you can change your spec to match your new gear without having to go through countless hours or resources.

[ZGoten]

^I'm sorry aohige, but for the D2 vs. D3 debate, you are too late. That's already over and I posted my final statement on it some time ago. My previous post had nothing to do with D3 or its potential lack of choices compared to D2. Please carefully observe what the topic actually is before making accusations. Your post before this one came too late as well, implying that I have an unchangeable view on the game when my post before that actually proved the exact opposite. Now, however, I was merely talking about the system of a skill tree in general, not about specific games or anything.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by ZGoten

^I'm sorry aohige, but for the D2 vs. D3 debate, you are too late. That's already over and I posted my final statement on it some time ago. My previous post had nothing to do with D3 or its potential lack of choices compared to D2. Please carefully observe what the topic actually is before making accusations. Your post before this one came too late as well, implying that I have an unchangeable view on the game when my post before that actually proved the exact opposite. Now, however, I was merely talking about the system of a skill tree in general, not about specific games or anything.

I actually said view on the game IS changable, but it may take time.
I also said opinion on liking or not liking a game is never wrong, it's simply subjective.
As for your "final words", my statement is exactly tailored to fit your final statement. You said you'll keep eye on it. What did I say?

And there are plenty of times when an opinion of a game changes much later, and you decide to pick it up.

Besides, knowing Blizzard, the game will probably be completely different entity a year from now.

So... boomerang?

As for the skill system in general, you did mention specifically "D2".
And it still sticks. D2's skill system did not allow for a flexible viable options, and seriously, you already know this. I don't think there's any room for argument there, even the developers themselves admit it.

If you mean a similar system to D2, then perhaps you may be right. But I don't think I've seen it implimented to actually give broader options.
This is the same reason why WoW's skill tree system is getting revamped in Pandaria. They're going to be much simpler, giving "actual" choices rather than an artificial options that aren't useful.

[ZGoten]

D2's skill system did not allow for a flexible viable options, and seriously, you already know this. I don't think there's any room for argument there, even the developers themselves admit it.

But that was not the point of my post at all. The point was to say, that just because it didn't work for Diablo II, does not mean it can't work. Your post does not follow up on this whatsoever, but instead brings D3 back in the game and accuses me of not admitting that D2's system was flawed and suggests that we are still holding up the same conversation as hours ago, which we are not.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by ZGoten

But that was not the point of my post at all. The point was to say, that just because it didn't work for Diablo II, does not mean it can't work. You post does not follow up on this whatsoever, but instead brings D3 back in the game and accuses me of not admitting that D2's system was flawed.

Do you actually have an example of the system working the way you say?
Or making a hyperthetical what-ifs?

[ZGoten]

So now you understand what I'm saying.

About your question, hyperthetical what-ifs are the basis of every development in game design. I have no example to show that there can in fact be an action rpg based on a skill tree system, that offers many different viable or competitive builds for each and every class. That being sad, I don't need to have one. The idea that a skill tree system can never achieve such a goal is quite frankly ridiculous. I'm not saying balancing the skills, options and numbers is easy, but I really hope you are not suggesting that unless there is one game that gets it right it is foolish to believe such a system can work on a greater level.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by ZGoten

So now you understand what I'm saying.

About your question, hyperthetical what-ifs are the basis of every development in game design. I have no example to show that there can in fact be an action rpg based on a skill tree system, that offers many different viable or competitive builds for each and evry class. That being sad, I don't need to have one. The idea that a skill tree system can never achieve such a goal is quite frankly ridiculous. I'm not saying balancing the skills, options and numbers is easy, but I really hope you are not suggesting that unless there is one game that gets it right it is foolish to believe such a system can work on a greater level.

No, of course not. But "looks good on paper" doesn't mean much if it doesn't get accomplished, especially for a system that's been around for over a decade.
Don't you think it's much more logical to improve the system to make it work, such as what D3 and WoW Panderia is doing, rather than trying to get the older system to work?

Such is also the logical steps of designing a game.

[Duo Maxwell]

It's also foolish to believe that if you stick to one idea, it will eventually work out. Time is money, and I think you know it. If they found a better solution, then why would they scrap it because "it's not what the old one is"?

[ZGoten]

I don't think it's definately more logical to come up with new ideas instead of working on improving older and fawed models, but at the same time, what matters are the results. So, if D3's approach does in fact work, like I said, I'll be happy. In the case things should turn out that way, I just don't want people to look back at D2 with the believe that skill trees are an antiquated form of game design that can't possibly work as well. But I think that we are on the same page in that regard.

[aohige]

You can say all day long that communism can work too, but you're gonna have to prove it if you are going to convince the crowd.

No, that was a joke. Don't need an actual political debate.

[ZGoten]

But wouldn't you agree that balancing a game is much easier than balancing a society? ^^