Blizzard gain a flash of insight?

[MMAgCh]

We recognize that the item hunt is just not enough for a long-term sustainable end-game. There are still tons of people playing every day and week, and playing a lot, but eventually they're going to run out of stuff to do (if they haven't already). Killing enemies and finding items is a lot of fun, and we think we have a lot of the systems surrounding that right, or at least on the right path with a few corrections and tweaks. But honestly Diablo III is not World of Warcraft. We aren't going to be able to pump out tons of new systems and content every couple months. There needs to be something else that keeps people engaged, and we know it's not there right now.

We're working toward 1.0.4, which we're really trying to pack with as many fixes and changes we can to help you guys out (and we'll have a bunch of articles posted with all the details as we get closer), and we're of course working on 1.1 with PvP arenas. I think both those patches will do a lot to give people things to do, and get them excited about playing, but they're not going to be a real end-game solution, at least not what we would expect out of a proper end-game. We have some ideas for progression systems, but honestly it's a huge feature if we want to try to do it right, and not something we could envision being possible until well after 1.1 which it itself still a ways out. (Source)

...

Hindsight is 20/20 I suppose, but we believed pre-release that the item hunt would be far more sustainable, and would work to be a proper end-game for quite a while. That didn't turn out to be true, and we recognize that. (Source)

I feel this deserves its own thread because it's probably the single most cogent, honest admission I've seen that as it is right now, D3 isn't everything it should be. Will they manage to fix it eventually? Who knows. That they're realising that no, it's really not working out too well as-is, at least is a start.

[FireIceTalon]

No shit it isnt WoW....so stop TURNING it into WoW. Get rid of the enrage timers, lower the repair costs back to normal, get rid of the resurrection countdowns, eliminate all the cheesy monster affixes, and give us a good Diablo game already. Guess at least they are starting to recognize the errors of their ways - now lets see if they follow through. I am skeptical though because of past results.

[Ashock]

We recognize that the item hunt is just not enough for a long-term sustainable end-game. There are still tons of people playing every day and week, and playing a lot, but eventually they're going to run out of stuff to do (if they haven't already). Killing enemies and finding items is a lot of fun, and we think we have a lot of the systems surrounding that right, or at least on the right path with a few corrections and tweaks. But honestly Diablo III is not World of Warcraft. We aren't going to be able to pump out tons of new systems and content every couple months. There needs to be something else that keeps people engaged, and we know it's not there right now.

We're working toward 1.0.4, which we're really trying to pack with as many fixes and changes we can to help you guys out (and we'll have a bunch of articles posted with all the details as we get closer), and we're of course working on 1.1 with PvP arenas. I think both those patches will do a lot to give people things to do, and get them excited about playing, but they're not going to be a real end-game solution, at least not what we would expect out of a proper end-game. We have some ideas for progression systems, but honestly it's a huge feature if we want to try to do it right, and not something we could envision being possible until well after 1.1 which it itself still a ways out. (Source)

...

Hindsight is 20/20 I suppose, but we believed pre-release that the item hunt would be far more sustainable, and would work to be a proper end-game for quite a while. That didn't turn out to be true, and we recognize that. (Source)

I feel this deserves its own thread because it's probably the single most cogent, honest admission I've seen that as it is right now, D3 isn't everything it should be. Will they manage to fix it eventually? Who knows. That they're realising that no, it's really not working out too well as-is, at least is a start.

Can't fix a game that is basically designed around and funnelled into a flawed concept and that is the RMAH. There is actually nothing to fix, as it does exactly what it is meant to do.

To fix it, they would have to change the game fundamentally and there is no way that would happen. Oh, they'll tweak it and make it somewhat better as far as the little annoyances, they will eventually release the PVP patch which will interest some ppl for a bit, but they will not and at this point probably can not gut it, and sadly that is the only way to make this game comparable in quality, popularity, and longevity to D1 and D2.

[Treesh]

The item hunt was fun in D2, but what they are forgetting is that you still were able to progress your character while you were item hunting. I never did bother to get a character up to cap in D2 because I didn't hit it naturally during the playthroughs. In D3, you're capped and done with a character before you even finish hell difficulty. That's going to kill a lot of the drive to continue playing after 60. PvP may help alleviate that for some, but definitely not for me. Plus, I'm still looking at PvP in D3 similarly to how they kept telling people there would be player housing in WoW.

[FoxBat]

The item hunt was fun in D2, but what they are forgetting is that you still were able to progress your character while you were item hunting.

That's exactly what this quote is addressing and nothing more. They are talking about "alternate progression systems" such as D2's leveling and rerolling for different builds. Everyone wants to read their own greivence into things, but they seem pretty content with how items are being handled for the most part, and are instead looking at things *outside* of the item hunt. And no I don't think that includes making the game easier, although that might end up happening, it doesn't address this particular issue at all.

[Athenau]

I dunno, I think by far the biggest problem is that items are boring. They should fix that first.

[Bolty]

What interests me is the admission that they honestly thought the item hunt was a proper end-game. Somewhere along the line, someone at Blizzard decided to take one aspect of what made the Diablo series great and focus on that to the general exclusion of everything else.

It took me exactly two weeks to conclude this, but I'm not going to act like that's special - people were predicting it even before the game's release. At this point, they'd have to go back and change so much to re-tool the game to introduce a proper end-game that I'm not sure how many players will be left.

A bit frustrating to me. They designed a great game, but sort of left it hanging at the finish line. I've watched as so many players now follow this progression curve at various rates of speed:

1) Enjoy the heck out of the game in normal, nightmare, and hell difficulties
2) Get to Inferno / end-game
3) Realize the game is all about items, random gear acquisition, and the Auction House
4) Get bored and quit

Some people hit step 4 in a week! Others are just starting to hit it now. Yet more will be reaching it in the coming month. I still go back and forth trying to figure out if it's the game, or if it's just that it's 12 years later and people (well, me) expect more from the genre in general. I mean, MMOs were a nascent genre (in before the MUD crowd goes "no they weren't!") in the Diablo/Diablo 2 days, and now they're incredibly common - gaming itself may have just moved on from these games.

I realize I sound like a hater, but I'm just honestly stating what I've felt about Diablo III. I want to love the game - really, I mean I run a damn Diablo fansite - but something's just not there for me. I log in from time to time and usually within an hour I remember why I don't log in most nights. Is it me or the game? I'm not even remotely the gamer I was 12 years ago, and I keep wondering if I'd have the same opinion of D3 if it had come out back then. I really don't know, but I DO know that much of what I liked about Diablo II isn't present in Diablo III.

Edit: someone pointed me to Kripparrian's video where he discusses end-game with similar conclusions. For those unaware, this is the guy who beat Inferno Diablo hardcore before the first major Inferno nerfs.



Essentially, he notes that he plays Hardcore because there's just no end game present at all and it's the only thing to do. Not sure what he's doing now that he's beaten Hardcore.

[Chesspiece_face]

*clip* Kripparian talks out his ass *clip*

I saw that video and half way through I wanted to claw my ears out. Even if you accept that his feelings on the end game are correct everything he offers as a solution is cringe-worthy. It's obvious why he is a professional game player and not a professional game designer.

Frankly if Blizzard takes any suggestions like this seriously I will accept that DIII is officially dead and that Blizzard as a development house deserves no more respect for what they do. (Or don't do in this case, which is design and craft competant games.)

[Mavfin]

Frankly if Blizzard takes any suggestions like this seriously I will accept that DIII is officially dead and that Blizzard as a development house deserves no more respect for what they do. (Or don't do in this case, which is design and craft competant games.)

Yeah, Kripp definitely failed to impress me here.

[Nystul]

The item hunt was fun in D2, but what they are forgetting is that you still were able to progress your character while you were item hunting. I never did bother to get a character up to cap in D2 because I didn't hit it naturally during the playthroughs. In D3, you're capped and done with a character before you even finish hell difficulty. That's going to kill a lot of the drive to continue playing after 60. PvP may help alleviate that for some, but definitely not for me. Plus, I'm still looking at PvP in D3 similarly to how they kept telling people there would be player housing in WoW.

Your approach to games actually seems like fun to me. I never understood the appeal of "grinding", "farming", etc. Repeating a fun area every now and then, sure. But trying to max levels or doing loot runs day after day? To me these are things for when your ego is tied up in that character or maybe you are trying to make money selling items or something. Whatever it is, it's not why I played Diablo.

[Jester]

I feel this deserves its own thread because it's probably the single most cogent, honest admission I've seen that as it is right now, D3 isn't everything it should be. Will they manage to fix it eventually? Who knows. That they're realising that no, it's really not working out too well as-is, at least is a start.

I guess I'm a little lost. Have our expectations changed?

The only difference between where D3 is and where D1 was, in terms of the "endgame carrot" mechanic, is that D1 and D2 had a higher exp. cap, and D3 doesn't. Other than that, it's exactly the same - go down, kill stuff, get loot, come back up. Why is this more or less satisfying than a laz run? Or a mephisto run? You can already beat all the content, and variant play is now, as it was then, a choice you have to enforce on yourself.

One can argue that this just never was a very satisfying mechanic. (I would.) But it's basically the same mechanic it was going back to the beginning of the series, no?

-Jester

[LochnarITB]

I still go back and forth trying to figure out if it's the game, or if it's just that it's 12 years later and people (well, me) expect more from the genre in general. I mean, MMOs were a nascent genre (in before the MUD crowd goes "no they weren't!") in the Diablo/Diablo 2 days, and now they're incredibly common - gaming itself may have just moved on from these games.

I don't think it is so much that gaming has moved on but rather that they tried to add a few bits to move it into a genre that it is not. It is a dungeon crawl. IT IS NOT AN MMO. There should be no cries for, or attempts to provide, an "End Game". You should be able to progress through levels and equipment until you kill the main bad guy. YOU WIN!! The closest thing to end game should be making a variant or running another class, or even just doing gear runs to get better shinies just to show off. If Inferno existed at all, it should have been a natural progression in difficulty to challenge the best of the best, not a "make it impossible then double it then waaahhh you ruined our game". If they took off the level cap, those not as skilled could have built levels, along with more gear finds to finally wear their "I Won" button. The AH also should not exist. People say it just makes it easier for folks to trade but it does more than that. It trivializes much of the game, at least Normal to Hell. Feeling tested? Buy something off the AH. Don't worry about l2p, if you can play the AH game for items and gold you are good to go. They rush through the first three difficulties to finally smack up against Inferno, where everyone is looking for the best of the best gear, and the AH can no longer substitute for l2p (and don't cry to me about impossible - people have done it and what was once "impossible" turned into "oh, that wasn't so tough").

At the risk of sounding too "get off my lawn", the majority of gamers out there now have cut their teeth on console games that they run through to a conclusion and MMOs on their computers that they subscribe to and expect to continue to have more and more content to continue with their hard won levels. Blizzard had a beautifully crafted square peg. Either listening to marketing morons or public that didn't know better, Blizzard let themselves be convinced to fit that square peg into a round hole, ripping off all the interesting corners leaving the rough, less interesting round peg.



[edit] I actually wrote this last night, before Bolty added that video, but fell asleep without posting it. I just watched the video. I want my 6 minutes back.

[smegged]

I feel this deserves its own thread because it's probably the single most cogent, honest admission I've seen that as it is right now, D3 isn't everything it should be. Will they manage to fix it eventually? Who knows. That they're realising that no, it's really not working out too well as-is, at least is a start.

I guess I'm a little lost. Have our expectations changed?

The only difference between where D3 is and where D1 was, in terms of the "endgame carrot" mechanic, is that D1 and D2 had a higher exp. cap, and D3 doesn't. Other than that, it's exactly the same - go down, kill stuff, get loot, come back up. Why is this more or less satisfying than a laz run? Or a mephisto run? You can already beat all the content, and variant play is now, as it was then, a choice you have to enforce on yourself.

One can argue that this just never was a very satisfying mechanic. (I would.) But it's basically the same mechanic it was going back to the beginning of the series, no?

-Jester

I was never really around for Diablo 1 (I ran through normal difficulty once with Sirian and then once again by myself). But to me you are right in that Diablo 3 feels a lot more like Diablo 1 than Diablo 2. From more than just a story point of view, the actual gameplay and the way you build your character feels more like D1 than D2. The thing is that I feel like there was plenty of good stuff - fun stuff - that should have been carried over from Diablo 2.

Diablo 2, for all its flaws, had enough gameplay and customisation in it to allow nearly infinite builds. The only real problem with its build system is that you had to start at level 1 (why they couldn't have allowed you to start naked at level 30 in nightmare after you had beaten normal once is beyond me). Now there were huge flaws in itemisation (if you were to play the game normally, you would never see a rune higher than Vex and yet in nearly all of the runewords, Vex was one of the lower level runes) and combat system (defence was entirely useless for 99% of builds) but you had concrete choices which gave you an entirely different game each time.

There are really three types of characters:
1) Power characters (use cookie cutter builds)
2) Sub-optimal characters (either intentionally poorly build or badly built through ignorance) - these were sometimes called variants
3) Bone-fide variants (these characters imposed conditions that were not just conditions on how the character was built)

The real problem with D3 is that the whole second group of characters has been entirely removed because of these reasons:
a) Skills require no investment to change or upgrade
b) Stat points are not allocatable
c) Itemisation has been optimised

Point c is an interesting one that I'd only really thought about recently, but is entirely true. Currently every single barbarian wants exactly the same gear as every other barbarian. An axe is as good as a hammer is as good as a sword. A demon hunter wants exactly the same boots as a monk and a wizard wants exactly the same amulet as a witch doctor. You can gear your character badly, but you cannot gear your character well without gearing it almost identically to a power character of the same class.

An example of what I mean. In Diablo 2, as a sorcerous you could invest heavily in energy in your stat allocation and make up the hitpoint shortfall by using items which favoured +life. In Diablo 3, as a wizard, you want items which favour int, vit, resist all and +damage. In Diablo 2, I could have my giant axe of humongousness, which was really awesome for my axe barbarian that if it had have dropped for my mace barb would have been vendor trash.

Players build characters specifically to take advantage of certain items that they had drop (frostburns, the Grandfather etc...). Spiked shields were of great use to smitadins and of little use to sorcerouses. This made the game fun. The possibilities were endless. One could have an infinitely varied game without even having to create bone-fide variant characters.

People who are still with d3 these days seem to be moving to hardcore characters, because it is the only thing left with character-altering choices, even if the only choice it offers you above softcore is essentially to win every battle or reroll.

[Jester]

Diablo 2, for all its flaws, had enough gameplay and customisation in it to allow nearly infinite builds. The only real problem with its build system is that you had to start at level 1 (why they couldn't have allowed you to start naked at level 30 in nightmare after you had beaten normal once is beyond me). Now there were huge flaws in itemisation (if you were to play the game normally, you would never see a rune higher than Vex and yet in nearly all of the runewords, Vex was one of the lower level runes) and combat system (defence was entirely useless for 99% of builds) but you had concrete choices which gave you an entirely different game each time.

The only difference between choices in D2 and in D3 is that there were no takebacksies in D2. You can build an enormous variety of characters and skillsets in D3, from cookie cutters to weird variants and everything in between. If you want a "no takebacks" system like D2, you can play that yourself - just play it as a variant.

We've been given more choice, but people seem to be interpreting it as less. I'm not sure why.

-Jester

[smegged]

Diablo 2, for all its flaws, had enough gameplay and customisation in it to allow nearly infinite builds. The only real problem with its build system is that you had to start at level 1 (why they couldn't have allowed you to start naked at level 30 in nightmare after you had beaten normal once is beyond me). Now there were huge flaws in itemisation (if you were to play the game normally, you would never see a rune higher than Vex and yet in nearly all of the runewords, Vex was one of the lower level runes) and combat system (defence was entirely useless for 99% of builds) but you had concrete choices which gave you an entirely different game each time.

The only difference between choices in D2 and in D3 is that there were no takebacksies in D2. You can build an enormous variety of characters and skillsets in D3, from cookie cutters to weird variants and everything in between. If you want a "no takebacks" system like D2, you can play that yourself - just play it as a variant.

We've been given more choice, but people seem to be interpreting it as less. I'm not sure why.

-Jester

Yes and no. The difference between the two systems is the connection you feel with the character. You have to debate whether you get the extra 5 strength to be able to wear that item or not. In Diablo 3 there really isn't that choice. Sure, we can always instantly respec our build, but the primary currency is not stats and skills, but items. That's the fundamental difference.

[Mavfin]

The only difference between choices in D2 and in D3 is that there were no takebacksies in D2. You can build an enormous variety of characters and skillsets in D3, from cookie cutters to weird variants and everything in between. If you want a "no takebacks" system like D2, you can play that yourself - just play it as a variant.

We've been given more choice, but people seem to be interpreting it as less. I'm not sure why.

-Jester

I'm completely on board with this, and you say it much more eloquently than I can.

[Jester]

Yes and no. The difference between the two systems is the connection you feel with the character. You have to debate whether you get the extra 5 strength to be able to wear that item or not. In Diablo 3 there really isn't that choice. Sure, we can always instantly respec our build, but the primary currency is not stats and skills, but items. That's the fundamental difference.

I guess there seem to me to be three variables at play here. (See also, the thread about the Mass Effect 1 vs 2 item system...)

1) The number of choices ("lots of options")
2) The impact choices have on game play ("choices that matter")
3) The permanence of choices ("respeccing")

For the ME1/2 debate, I was arguing that 2 is more important than 1: I would rather have two interesting, differentiated skills that play differently, than 10 skills that play almost identically, or 9 broken skills and 1 clearly superior skill.

For D3, they seem to have done a great job of 1 and 2 - not an easy combination. The sheer number of combinations and builds possible with the various skills and runes boggles the mind, and at least most of them work - certainly a much larger share than D2 skills! Some are better than others, and some mix of defense and offence is (probably) necessary, but there are a great many ways to skin this cat for each class.

The only question then, is whether 3 matters. There are pros and cons to permanence. It does add something to the roleplaying flavour. But in this situation, I don't see why it is more fun to build a 2nd wizard to try disintegrate vs. arcane orb, or whatever. All that encourages is endless skill tree plotting, and a whole swack of grindy replaying of old areas. It isn't even the kind of fun permanence that makes hardcore so adrenalin-loaded. If you pick the wrong skill or build, then you feel kind of stupid, but you don't feel challenged, or excited.

Meanwhile, as it stands, you are encouraged to try a variety of skills and playstyles, to customize to your preference rather than to a cookie cutter build, to adapt your toolkit to particular challenges. That seems like an interesting challenge to me.

They could make the skills slightly less modular - maybe have a respec function back in town that costs nontrivial resources. But I for one am thankful that Blizzard went for the system they did.

-Jester

[NuurAbSaal]

The only difference between choices in D2 and in D3 is that there were no takebacksies in D2. You can build an enormous variety of characters and skillsets in D3, from cookie cutters to weird variants and everything in between. If you want a "no takebacks" system like D2, you can play that yourself - just play it as a variant.

We've been given more choice, but people seem to be interpreting it as less. I'm not sure why.

-Jester

I'm completely on board with this, and you say it much more eloquently than I can.

That's the way I see it as well, more or less. Well, more, actually. Now it's back to staying out of the "discussion" about D3 again for me .

take care
Tarabulus

[Lissa]

The problem with D3 that D1 and D2 did not share is that you hit the level cap and then it's strictly an item hunt and getting your ass handed to you until you get the gear so your ass isn't handed to you as often. In D1 and D2, getting to cap was something that took a long, long time and while making your way to cap, you were doing the item hunting as well. This is why D1 for me had a lot of longevity whereas D3 is starting to fade after getting two toons (DH and Barb) to cap and just becoming annoyed with the item hunt since you need very specific affixes on your gear to progress (typically main stat, vit, then depending on build, things like crit hit, crit damage, all resistance, armor, attack speed, attack damage percent, attack damage integer, sockets, run speed on boots, and life on hit). I don't know how many times I've either sold items that were absolutely worthless or turned into crafting materials (like I did with one legedary hand x-bow, Calamity, that was absolutely garbage). Ultimately, with D1 and D2, I always felt like I was progressing and in D3, I don't feel like I'm progressing at all unless I get enough gold to buy something off the AH or get lucky and get a good drop with useful affixes for my toons.

[ViralSpiral]

Speaking of legendaries, got my first one. The Burning Axe of Sankis on a character who can use it at least a couple of levels. Wielding Boatmurdered is lulzy, I admit.