Blizzard vs. Real Money Trading (RMT)

[Roland]

It probably sounded like I'm picking on you specifically but I was more responding to a long standing curiosity. I've been here at the lounge since 1999, and there has never been a time when people weren't complaining about how Blizzard has abandoned the principles that made them great. I just want to know what those are.

I believe a lot of people have idealized something that never really was, and have set their expectations inappropriately based on that idealization. Bolty's post is very much how I feel about it. I am hardly a fanboy, I'm more of a pragmatist.

Thanks for at least attempting to explain your objections to me.

Bolty touched upon part of it, and very nicely. For me, though, it's much more than just nostalgia and unrealistic expectations. It's the subtler (or, perhaps, not so subtler) things. Take the decision to combine D2 Classic with Lord of Destruction. I can only criticize them for this so much, because as a previous modder I understand how difficult it is to maintain two separate entities, but it kind of flew in the face of the original direction they led us to believe they were moving in (correct me if I'm wrong Bolty? I seem to recall them originally stating they were going to keep the two separate). The graphical changes to Firewall and Blaze that were implemented (hard-coded, mind you, so modders couldn't even change it) for the sake of performance on legacy computers, when Diablo II had been out for well over 5 years (rough guess) - it completely ruined the very mechanics of the skills, Blaze especially. How about the changes to monster resists that culminated in triple- and quad-immunes, that were far easier for some classes to overcome than others?

Or, to stay current with the upcoming game in question, the decision to remove weapon switching because they felt the playerbase found it too "confusing" in Diablo II (as I recall this was a much vaunted feature of D2; it garnered great praise at the time!). The removal of skillpoints and attribute points because in the past people didn't handle them the way the designers ultimately wanted them to (maybe because the system was poorly set up from the beginning? Honestly, modders were able to fix this system better than it was originally, so you can't tell me it was "too difficult"). There are numerous other small changes along those lines I could name (removal of potions, for one), but either I can't think of them, or they're too minor to really gripe about. Besides, it's not always about the change, but about the why behind the change.

I agree with everyone that Blizzard as a company has evolved drastically from where it started, and that's OK. I understand the game, too, has evolved immensely, and that's OK too. What I gripe about is the glimpses behind the scenes as to why they did this, or didn't do this. Some of the changes, though I may initially react with shock and dismay, may end up better in the end. Some may not. Such is life, and we'll either accept them or we won't. What gets me, though, is that sometimes it just feels like they either a) had a poor structure for designing the game (not enough discipline and long-term planning), or b) simply didn't put enough effort into finding ways to implement what they wanted. The skill system is a great example. Torchlight adopted the Diablo II style of skill trees, but made it so that almost all of them (and even this could be enhanced further to be truly all) were viable throughout the game. It's not an impossible feat, and yet they talk as if it is. That doesn't invoke feelings of confidence in their design nor their goals, regardless of whether or not the end result is positive. If the changes all work out for the better then great! I'll be happy, and I'll gladly salute them on a job well done. It's just not very comforting to hear them talk about the decisions behind the game when they express so much uncertainty and doubt - and that's something that's seemingly been getting worse with time, not better.

I'm not trying to condemn the product without even playing, nor am I trying to condemn the company without having seen first hand what they've produced. I'm not even saying that what I want is D2 with prettier graphics. Some of the changes I'm greatly looking forward to (Rune system, most notably), while others I'm apprehensive about, but at least open-minded towards (Skills, Attributes). It's not about nostalgia for me. It's about doing what Blizzard has always said they do: building the best game they can. All their talk about "what the masses want", in an age where every game within any given genre is virtually the same, just makes me apprehensive, and I worry that they'll have sacrificed the heart of what made Diablo fun in the name of "pleasing the masses" - a.k.a. gross profits.

Sorry if I've come across as overly defensive. I just don't want people to get the wrong idea about my stance.