That video pretty much summarizes everything I hated about hostility in Diablo 2. It really sucked that you could be a low level character running quests with other people, having fun, and then a level 80 comes in your game and kills everyone, camps your corpses, and basically forces everyone to leave the game and lose progress on the quest.
Not that hostility would be an option in D3, but if it were it should really be level based so that you could only hostile people +-5 levels of you or something along those lines. I think that hostility in D2 did add a sense of excitement and risk to the game, but only when it was a fair match. If you were a level 18 and a level 20 turned hostility on you, both sides in this scenario risked dying in a fight, and it added a new dimension and thrill to the game for both the hunter and hunted. Being a level 80 sorceress with all the waypoints in normal mode is like turning on the invincibility cheat.
Well considering the sorc in that video is level 30, and everyone else was level 50. It bassicly just means they're bad at the game.
Uh the sorc was 2 shotting them and unlimited teleports with no cd so op. There was NO WAY they could have killed him.
Well the biggest issue I think most people have with the idea of hostility as it stood in D2 was that people would basically harass people who didn't want to participate to the point where they would make u quit ur own game out of frustration.
I see a lot of people on here who think that it wouldn't be abused if they brought it back and that game makers should be the only ones with the option. Well that also would mean that d-bag players could host a game claiming it was an MF run or w/e and then flag and kill people who come in. Same problem just a different delivery. There is no way in hell that blizzard is going to implement a hostile system back in to the game. If they did then the arena system wouldn't need to be there.
To be honest, i dont see one good reason to include it, as long as you can challenge someone and they can accept then its fine, i know it wont be included at launch but im sure it wont take long for Blizzard to incorporate such a system.
There hasn't really been 1 legit reason for including hostility in this thread.
Bilateral hostility - yes, IF there was a way to prevent the spamming of invites. After all, it's fun to MF with your mate for an hour and then challenge him to a quick duel, to test out the gear yo both found.
Unilateral hostility - definitely not. Only griefers want this.
Bilateral hostility requires a kick option then, otherwise douchebags will come into a game hostile you and get really annoying until you accept. And even then I feel it creates some problems.
If you want duels make it only doable in town and requires the two players to be next to each others, I'd be fine with that. Something like WoW duel system.
Can someone give a good reason for hostility to exist? I mean, seriously, as long as there is a duel option for Arena...what's the point? We have a max of 4 players in a game at a time, no way to go to a game by name, and no password system for games. There doesn't seem to be a good reason to have hostility at all.
Is this another case of... Diablo 3 is different from Diablo 2 so I'm going to complain? Or is there an actual benefit to hostile?
My favorite thing about wow was the first 2.5 or so years where you were rarely ever safe at all. It was almost like territorial disputes. You could literally "own" a region for a time if you got all of your friends or guild together. I'll never forget crashing servers in the first weeks with multi-hundred person raids crossing the ocean and riding into Thunder Bluff for example, it was always hilarious to me when dozens or even a task force of the other faction strolled into where I was. Normally I ran around heroing it up solo in quest areas like WPL/EPL, or with a friend or two trying to beat the odds and see if anyone wanted to get mad or challenge us and make things interesting. The reverse also happened, made things fun and interesting.
They ultimately made guards more and more powerful, more classes got stealth, we got flying mounts then flying mounts outsped normal mounts by like 300%, and tried to force pvp in a controlled area (like arenas and battlegrounds) by giving players gear and title incentives. I'm fine with that, but it gets boring fast because then you start having to worry about class/gear balance, RNG, rank,/rating, responsibility to the team to show up at specific times, and more. Itemized+controlled pvp is a joke. Ultimately you were able to sit in town and go to any form of controlled pvp/pve you wanted. I was stoked to try age of empires online, itemized RTS pvp left a sour taste in my mouth. Most people can't even hack having their performance reflected in a 99% balanced game like starcraft 2 when there are only 3 race (and zero pre-determined item or class/class comp advantages) which have hardly changed over years.
Most players just can't hack losing, especially when they don't mentally prepare themselves for it ahead of time. To me that's what makes things interesting, when something is actually on the line in pvp like pride or territory. Now I just hope we get a quick and easy /duel feature so we're not even more pathetic than PVE wow server pvp, if that were even possible.
To recap, the pvp we are going to have is a joke and an after thought (there is nothing on the line, it will be imbalanced through itemization, class comp, and RNG will still exist where one player just recieves more or less luck than another). We're not even sure if we will be able to dick around and duel with our friends, which was still possible in even the most carebear wow servers, and just the same, there will be no visual ranking- and for good reason because of what I've pointed out above... And with that said I've already accepted that the vast majority of people do not like taking risks and I really do not expect much in terms of pvp from diablo.
My favorite thing about wow was the first 2.5 or so years where you were rarely ever safe at all. It was almost like territorial disputes. You could literally "own" a region for a time if you got all of your friends or guild together. I'll never forget crashing servers in the first weeks with multi-hundred person raids crossing the ocean and riding into Thunder Bluff for example, it was always hilarious to me when dozens or even a task force of the other faction strolled into where I was. Normally I ran around heroing it up solo in quest areas like WPL/EPL, or with a friend or two trying to beat the odds and see if anyone wanted to get mad or challenge us and make things interesting. The reverse also happened, made things fun and interesting.
They ultimately made guards more and more powerful, more classes got stealth, we got flying mounts then flying mounts outsped normal mounts by like 300%, and tried to force pvp in a controlled area (like arenas and battlegrounds) by giving players gear and title incentives. I'm fine with that, but it gets boring fast because then you start having to worry about class/gear balance, RNG, rank,/rating, responsibility to the team to show up at specific times, and more. Itemized+controlled pvp is a joke. Ultimately you were able to sit in town and go to any form of controlled pvp/pve you wanted. I was stoked to try age of empires online, itemized RTS pvp left a sour taste in my mouth. Most people can't even hack having their performance reflected in a 99% balanced game like starcraft 2 when there are only 3 race (and zero pre-determined item or class/class comp advantages) which have hardly changed over years.
Most players just can't hack losing, especially when they don't mentally prepare themselves for it ahead of time. To me that's what makes things interesting, when something is actually on the line in pvp like pride or territory. Now I just hope we get a quick and easy /duel feature so we're not even more pathetic than PVE wow server pvp, if that were even possible.
To recap, the pvp we are going to have is a joke and an after thought (there is nothing on the line, it will be imbalanced through itemization, class comp, and RNG will still exist where one player just recieves more or less luck than another). We're not even sure if we will be able to dick around and duel with our friends, which was still possible in even the most carebear wow servers, and just the same, there will be no visual ranking- and for good reason because of what I've pointed out above... And with that said I've already accepted that the vast majority of people do not like taking risks and I really do not expect much in terms of pvp from diablo.
PvP will only be a joke if you're looking for some highly competitive PvP. If you're just looking to get together with a few people and kill other players, PvP will be a ton of fun. The biggest thing to realize is if you're buying Diablo 3 for PvP, you're doing it wrong. Diablo 3 is about PvM and story primarily and not PvP. Its ALWAYS been that way.
Hostility didn't add anything to Diablo 2 other then segmenting the community heavily. So many people made private games so that they wouldn't be griefed that the majority of public games just became baal runs and trade rooms. I'm glad hostility was removed from Diablo 3, as are a majority of the community.
Non consensual PVP is a lot different from taking risks, its about imposing and forcing people to engage in play that they want no part of.
Arena is competitive in WOW, but you seem to have something against 'itemized +controlled pvp'. I'm not certain what the reason is from your post but it could be that you're unable to get a reliable partner for your arena duels. I understand there isn't much of a 1v1 PVP niche in WOW because of balance reasons. Well you can rejoice because in D3, I suspect there will be random allies assigned to you in Arena. Blizzard hasn't detailed the arena system much yet in D3 but I would be most surprised if there wasn't a simple and convienent way for those unfamiliar with PVP to queue for a teamfight..
Hopefully your problem isn't the desire to attack those who would have nothing to do with PVP. That is something quite different from risk, balance issues or competitiveness indeed.
PvP will only be a joke if you're looking for some highly competitive PvP. If you're just looking to get together with a few people and kill other players, PvP will be a ton of fun. The biggest thing to realize is if you're buying Diablo 3 for PvP, you're doing it wrong. Diablo 3 is about PvM and story primarily and not PvP. Its ALWAYS been that way.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Why fight other people of near equal gear/skill to the death with any MMR at all, if it's all meaningless. And trust me, I've already bought the CE and am well aware of what I'm getting into. I'm not complaining, I just expect there will be more to come in the future.
Non consensual PVP is a lot different from taking risks, its about imposing and forcing people to engage in play that they want no part of.
Arena is competitive in WOW, but you seem to have something against 'itemized +controlled pvp'. I'm not certain what the reason is from your post but it could be that you're unable to get a reliable partner for your arena duels. I understand there isn't much of a 1v1 PVP niche in WOW because of balance reasons. Well you can rejoice because in D3, I suspect there will be random allies assigned to you in Arena. Blizzard hasn't detailed the arena system much yet in D3 but I would be most surprised if there wasn't a simple and convienent way for those unfamiliar with PVP to queue for a teamfight..
Hopefully your problem isn't the desire to attack those who would have nothing to do with PVP. That is something quite different from risk, balance issues or competitiveness indeed.
Wow always rubbed me the wrong way once arenas landed because it became a game of exploiting the gimmicks each season, and it made it *very* obvious how much gear has an impact in a "competitive" rpg environment as well as class composition in a game of team battles. It only makes sense though, power is power. I am a competitive, competent player when it is fun to be. I am not antisocial like you may be suggesting, I did everything from playing alone, leading small arena teams, leading multiple hundred man raids, heading "competitive" PvE guilds and pvp guilds, and had tens of thousands of views on warcraftmovies even in it's infancy. I was faction third GM in bg's on my server and cleared duelist to glad several times despite only playing for at most 3 months at a time once the expansions started slowly ruining the game, and a masters sc2 player since season 2(and MMR at the end of 1 when leagues locked).
All of that means next to nothing, the point is I know about controlled competitive pvp and I understand many, though not all, of the challenges there are when it comes to balancing itemized pvp. When you add an arena where players are supposedly matched against other (hidden) ranked players, you then *have* to worry about balance at least some, and that's where things start going down hill. It got old fast when every season the top 20 on each division was more or less the same FotM class comp with the same exact items. The difference in rank 100 and rank 1 was often a broken weapon/tier bonus from PvE or some overpowering trinket etc. There was one season where I was just dicking around with a friend who happened to be a paladin (on my deathknight) and fucking spammed icy touch to 2450+ 2v2 in a couple of hours.
Even if they could perfectly balance all the classes and class comps with the best cookie cutter builds for a time when they stop releasing new content, (and they won't even come close), there are still other problems such as RNG factoring in, and the challenge/cost of having to have a team rebalance the game for each new patch/expansion that changes much of anything significant as a (in world of warcraft) a trinket or something that made or broke a build.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Why fight other people of near equal gear/skill to the death with any MMR at all, if it's all meaningless. And trust me, I've already bought the CE and am well aware of what I'm getting into. I'm not complaining, I just expect there will be more to come in the future.
If you're expecting more then a casual PvP experience, I have a feeling you're going to be waiting a long time. Blizzard's stance on highly competitive PvP in Diablo 3 has been 'Shut up PvP guy', lol. I expect the PvP will be fun to do when I just don't feel like grinding mobs, but I'm not ever expecting leagues, tournaments, etc...from Diablo 3 (nor do I personally care). It is just not what Diablo is about. PvP has always been an afterthought in Diablo and I'm glad it hasn't changed as it lets them focus their resources on a very awesome PvM experience, which I'm eager to play through a few hundred times.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Why fight other people of near equal gear/skill to the death with any MMR at all, if it's all meaningless. And trust me, I've already bought the CE and am well aware of what I'm getting into. I'm not complaining, I just expect there will be more to come in the future.
If you're expecting more then a casual PvP experience, I have a feeling you're going to be waiting a long time. Blizzard's stance on highly competitive PvP in Diablo 3 has been 'Shut up PvP guy', lol. I expect the PvP will be fun to do when I just don't feel like grinding mobs, but I'm not ever expecting leagues, tournaments, etc...from Diablo 3 (nor do I personally care). It is just not what Diablo is about. PvP has always been an afterthought in Diablo and I'm glad it hasn't changed as it lets them focus their resources on a very awesome PvM experience, which I'm eager to play through a few hundred times.
I agree with you, on all but one point if I didn't manage to get it across before now.
I wouldn't have minded if pvp played a larger role in d3. I get that pvp is just a way to mash buttons and kill time in the world of sanctuary- an afterthought and I understand why, maybe even better than most. All I was saying is I really wouldn't have cared if something as brutal as hostility was reintroduced, and I think we will be seeing more pvp functionality in the years ahead, albeit in a controlled enviroment.
I agree with you, on all but one point if I didn't manage to get it across before now.
I wouldn't have minded if pvp played a larger role in d3. I get that pvp is just a way to mash buttons and kill time in the world of sanctuary- an afterthought and I understand why, maybe even better than most. All I was saying is I really wouldn't have cared if something as brutal as hostility was reintroduced, and I think we will be seeing more pvp functionality in the years ahead, albeit in a controlled enviroment.
Perhaps you can answer my question then...what would hostility bring to the game? You say you wouldn't mind it being returned, but what actual benefits would there be to it being re-introduced, with the game designed as it currently is?
I agree with you, on all but one point if I didn't manage to get it across before now.
I wouldn't have minded if pvp played a larger role in d3. I get that pvp is just a way to mash buttons and kill time in the world of sanctuary- an afterthought and I understand why, maybe even better than most. All I was saying is I really wouldn't have cared if something as brutal as hostility was reintroduced, and I think we will be seeing more pvp functionality in the years ahead, albeit in a controlled enviroment.
Perhaps you can answer my question then...what would hostility bring to the game? You say you wouldn't mind it being returned, but what actual benefits would there be to it being re-introduced, with the game designed as it currently is?
It wouldn't be reintroduced because the cons outweigh the pros, in that there are more people who want to public monster slay than there are those who want world pvp.
It wouldn't be reintroduced because the cons outweigh the pros, in that there are more people who want to public monster slay than there are those who want world pvp.
So, are you agreeing its a bad idea then? I mean, I'd honestly love to hear some good reasons for open PvP to exist. Hostility in Diablo 2 greatly helped caused the rift between PvP and PvM players you're seeing in the posts. Many of us love the idea of Arena as it gives PvP a solid part of the game that will even be fun for casual players. Funny thing that many of the PvM players here actually are MORE interested in PvP due to the changes Blizzard has made....
This thread should be a poll so I could vote "no."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My place really was here. I was too foolish and stubborn to notice. But, what I truly hoped for then was here. Why do I always realize it When I've already lost it.
It wouldn't be reintroduced because the cons outweigh the pros, in that there are more people who want to public monster slay than there are those who want world pvp.
So, are you agreeing its a bad idea then? I mean, I'd honestly love to hear some good reasons for open PvP to exist. Hostility in Diablo 2 greatly helped caused the rift between PvP and PvM players you're seeing in the posts. Many of us love the idea of Arena as it gives PvP a solid part of the game that will even be fun for casual players. Funny thing that many of the PvM players here actually are MORE interested in PvP due to the changes Blizzard has made....
I am agreeing that given the context hostility is a pretty awful idea while I myself would not have a problem with it (and would even appreciate it because of the way in which I plan to play the game with friends/family and only rarely with randoms). I don't expect everyone to play the game the same way or for the same reasons I do, and so that's why I think it'd be terrible for those people who plan on join-all public play. I'm not trying to fight for it to be reintroduced, I was simply saying it would have worked great for me.
I am agreeing that given the context hostility is a pretty awful idea while I myself would not have a problem with it (and would even appreciate it because of the way in which I plan to play the game with friends/family and only rarely with randoms). I don't expect everyone to play the game the same way or for the same reasons I do, and so that's why I think it'd be terrible for those people who plan on join-all public play. I'm not trying to fight for it to be reintroduced, I was simply saying it would have worked great for me.
I respect that point of view and that's honestly the point I've been trying to make. I get why people want these kind of features, but given the context of Diablo 3 and the way it's designed...they wouldn't benefit the community as a whole.
Uh the sorc was 2 shotting them and unlimited teleports with no cd so op. There was NO WAY they could have killed him.
I see a lot of people on here who think that it wouldn't be abused if they brought it back and that game makers should be the only ones with the option. Well that also would mean that d-bag players could host a game claiming it was an MF run or w/e and then flag and kill people who come in. Same problem just a different delivery. There is no way in hell that blizzard is going to implement a hostile system back in to the game. If they did then the arena system wouldn't need to be there.
There hasn't really been 1 legit reason for including hostility in this thread.
Bilateral hostility requires a kick option then, otherwise douchebags will come into a game hostile you and get really annoying until you accept. And even then I feel it creates some problems.
If you want duels make it only doable in town and requires the two players to be next to each others, I'd be fine with that. Something like WoW duel system.
Is this another case of... Diablo 3 is different from Diablo 2 so I'm going to complain? Or is there an actual benefit to hostile?
They ultimately made guards more and more powerful, more classes got stealth, we got flying mounts then flying mounts outsped normal mounts by like 300%, and tried to force pvp in a controlled area (like arenas and battlegrounds) by giving players gear and title incentives. I'm fine with that, but it gets boring fast because then you start having to worry about class/gear balance, RNG, rank,/rating, responsibility to the team to show up at specific times, and more. Itemized+controlled pvp is a joke. Ultimately you were able to sit in town and go to any form of controlled pvp/pve you wanted. I was stoked to try age of empires online, itemized RTS pvp left a sour taste in my mouth. Most people can't even hack having their performance reflected in a 99% balanced game like starcraft 2 when there are only 3 race (and zero pre-determined item or class/class comp advantages) which have hardly changed over years.
Most players just can't hack losing, especially when they don't mentally prepare themselves for it ahead of time. To me that's what makes things interesting, when something is actually on the line in pvp like pride or territory. Now I just hope we get a quick and easy /duel feature so we're not even more pathetic than PVE wow server pvp, if that were even possible.
To recap, the pvp we are going to have is a joke and an after thought (there is nothing on the line, it will be imbalanced through itemization, class comp, and RNG will still exist where one player just recieves more or less luck than another). We're not even sure if we will be able to dick around and duel with our friends, which was still possible in even the most carebear wow servers, and just the same, there will be no visual ranking- and for good reason because of what I've pointed out above... And with that said I've already accepted that the vast majority of people do not like taking risks and I really do not expect much in terms of pvp from diablo.
PvP will only be a joke if you're looking for some highly competitive PvP. If you're just looking to get together with a few people and kill other players, PvP will be a ton of fun. The biggest thing to realize is if you're buying Diablo 3 for PvP, you're doing it wrong. Diablo 3 is about PvM and story primarily and not PvP. Its ALWAYS been that way.
Hostility didn't add anything to Diablo 2 other then segmenting the community heavily. So many people made private games so that they wouldn't be griefed that the majority of public games just became baal runs and trade rooms. I'm glad hostility was removed from Diablo 3, as are a majority of the community.
Arena is competitive in WOW, but you seem to have something against 'itemized +controlled pvp'. I'm not certain what the reason is from your post but it could be that you're unable to get a reliable partner for your arena duels. I understand there isn't much of a 1v1 PVP niche in WOW because of balance reasons. Well you can rejoice because in D3, I suspect there will be random allies assigned to you in Arena. Blizzard hasn't detailed the arena system much yet in D3 but I would be most surprised if there wasn't a simple and convienent way for those unfamiliar with PVP to queue for a teamfight..
Hopefully your problem isn't the desire to attack those who would have nothing to do with PVP. That is something quite different from risk, balance issues or competitiveness indeed.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Why fight other people of near equal gear/skill to the death with any MMR at all, if it's all meaningless. And trust me, I've already bought the CE and am well aware of what I'm getting into. I'm not complaining, I just expect there will be more to come in the future.
Wow always rubbed me the wrong way once arenas landed because it became a game of exploiting the gimmicks each season, and it made it *very* obvious how much gear has an impact in a "competitive" rpg environment as well as class composition in a game of team battles. It only makes sense though, power is power. I am a competitive, competent player when it is fun to be. I am not antisocial like you may be suggesting, I did everything from playing alone, leading small arena teams, leading multiple hundred man raids, heading "competitive" PvE guilds and pvp guilds, and had tens of thousands of views on warcraftmovies even in it's infancy. I was faction third GM in bg's on my server and cleared duelist to glad several times despite only playing for at most 3 months at a time once the expansions started slowly ruining the game, and a masters sc2 player since season 2(and MMR at the end of 1 when leagues locked).
All of that means next to nothing, the point is I know about controlled competitive pvp and I understand many, though not all, of the challenges there are when it comes to balancing itemized pvp. When you add an arena where players are supposedly matched against other (hidden) ranked players, you then *have* to worry about balance at least some, and that's where things start going down hill. It got old fast when every season the top 20 on each division was more or less the same FotM class comp with the same exact items. The difference in rank 100 and rank 1 was often a broken weapon/tier bonus from PvE or some overpowering trinket etc. There was one season where I was just dicking around with a friend who happened to be a paladin (on my deathknight) and fucking spammed icy touch to 2450+ 2v2 in a couple of hours.
Even if they could perfectly balance all the classes and class comps with the best cookie cutter builds for a time when they stop releasing new content, (and they won't even come close), there are still other problems such as RNG factoring in, and the challenge/cost of having to have a team rebalance the game for each new patch/expansion that changes much of anything significant as a (in world of warcraft) a trinket or something that made or broke a build.
If you're expecting more then a casual PvP experience, I have a feeling you're going to be waiting a long time. Blizzard's stance on highly competitive PvP in Diablo 3 has been 'Shut up PvP guy', lol. I expect the PvP will be fun to do when I just don't feel like grinding mobs, but I'm not ever expecting leagues, tournaments, etc...from Diablo 3 (nor do I personally care). It is just not what Diablo is about. PvP has always been an afterthought in Diablo and I'm glad it hasn't changed as it lets them focus their resources on a very awesome PvM experience, which I'm eager to play through a few hundred times.
I agree with you, on all but one point if I didn't manage to get it across before now.
I wouldn't have minded if pvp played a larger role in d3. I get that pvp is just a way to mash buttons and kill time in the world of sanctuary- an afterthought and I understand why, maybe even better than most. All I was saying is I really wouldn't have cared if something as brutal as hostility was reintroduced, and I think we will be seeing more pvp functionality in the years ahead, albeit in a controlled enviroment.
Perhaps you can answer my question then...what would hostility bring to the game? You say you wouldn't mind it being returned, but what actual benefits would there be to it being re-introduced, with the game designed as it currently is?
It wouldn't be reintroduced because the cons outweigh the pros, in that there are more people who want to public monster slay than there are those who want world pvp.
So, are you agreeing its a bad idea then? I mean, I'd honestly love to hear some good reasons for open PvP to exist. Hostility in Diablo 2 greatly helped caused the rift between PvP and PvM players you're seeing in the posts. Many of us love the idea of Arena as it gives PvP a solid part of the game that will even be fun for casual players. Funny thing that many of the PvM players here actually are MORE interested in PvP due to the changes Blizzard has made....
I am agreeing that given the context hostility is a pretty awful idea while I myself would not have a problem with it (and would even appreciate it because of the way in which I plan to play the game with friends/family and only rarely with randoms). I don't expect everyone to play the game the same way or for the same reasons I do, and so that's why I think it'd be terrible for those people who plan on join-all public play. I'm not trying to fight for it to be reintroduced, I was simply saying it would have worked great for me.
I respect that point of view and that's honestly the point I've been trying to make. I get why people want these kind of features, but given the context of Diablo 3 and the way it's designed...they wouldn't benefit the community as a whole.