DiabloFans

Quote from Winged

I honestly didn't notice the Thousand Pounder in the upper right that's him alright! Either he's not really a mini boss, but instead just a random instance area. Or by dying he got sent back to hell where he lives again.. Those are my two guesses.

Mmm, I don't remember, but was the thousand pounder said to be one-of-a-kind or just a rare variety of monster?

Quote from ScyberDragon

It basically lets you farm for gear throughout the entire game instead of just the bosses or last act in hell for the best gear.

It's also a pretty nice way of allowing people to experience all the lower-act randomized areas, which probably wouldn't happen otherwise.

Quote from akainu

I'm going to take this time to say I called it a long time ago that there was going to be a new difficulty level after hell for end game. (yes before inferno was ever mentioned)

ALL BOW TO MY FORESIGHT!

When I get out of work, I need to remember to find my post on a VERY similar idea I had to Inferno on the d3 forums ages ago.

WE SHALL SEE WHO'S FORESIGHT BOWS TO WHOM!!!!

edit:

Quote from Apoc

They mentioned nicer drops, but I wonder if that is still going to follow the linear progression of stats we will expect from lvl 1-60 or if indeed it has to be accelerated to compensate for the lack of new skills after max level.

Mm. Not sure what you're trying to say, but I think any loot that act 4 boss drops in Inferno will have a chance to drop off of say, a fallen, in act 1 Inferno. Bosses will likely drop more, or have an inherent "magic find bonus" but I think the range of loot will be the same for basically all mobs throughout Inferno.

I'd say roleplaying has more to do with deliberate choices, rather than any kind of permanancy.

Since you have all the skills available, there is a greater opportunity cost to sticking with those aligned with whatever character you choose to make.

For instance, if there is a portion of the game where having some zombie dogs would be great, but you don't because your WD only uses fire spells, there should be more roleplaying satisfaction in beating that section using only fire spells than giving in to "rollplay" and choosing the optimal skills.

You still don't have to worry about min/maxing if you don't want to. You can still play a wand barb if you like, or a bow wizard, or whatever.

And I do think people will be looking up wiki info on the games you mentioned. Just because you don't care about skill power doesn't mean others don't. And I am of the opinion that the vast majority of people are concerned with both roll and role capability, "I want to make a DH, but one that heavily uses traps! Kind of like Batman, but not so up-close!" vs "The most dps that a DH can output is if they take x,y,z passives and stick with double crossbows, therefore this is the only choice"-and-"my dh is actually all sunshines and lollipops, and really just wants to let the demons know that they're preventing themselves and others from self-actualizing, and that they'd be better off if they stopped doing that."

All three of these people can play and enjoy diablo 3.

Quote from bsf1206

So I still get to choose 6 active skills and 3 passives (or w/e it was), but i get skill points past that level to improve on the ones I really like, or change them in some way.

You just perfectly described runes. (maybe not for passives)

So I still get to choose 6 active skills, but i get rune levels to improve on the ones I really like, or change them in some way.

Quote from italofoca

I said they eliminated the character building aspect of the game, wich is really different. Character builds are nothing but a well planned strategy. Character building is the act to play an role in an game by creating an character.
Ex: "WD's should pick 1 summon skill, 1 AoE, 1 nuke, 1 cc skills, 1 dot and spiritwalk". This is an build.
Ex: "My WD will only use fire skills! I want him to be some sort of fire shaman". Thats character building.

You can still do that.

I want to make a barbarian that dual wields axes. I want him to be a raging berserker. I'm only going to take abilities that let me use 2 weapons or have the word "frenzy" in them.

When you play games that shares a D3's skill system (like guildwars) you will have the urge to just swap moves to see everything you have at your disposal and use the strongest strategy you find, instead of choose skills based on the character theme. Players are rewarded to just test each skill and use the strongest one. D3's skill system induces an rationality based on strategy and efficiency, not role playing.

The problem I see with your line of reasoning is that you assume people will automatically select the strongest skill simply because it is the strongest. If this were true, there would have been no "oddball" builds in D2.

By your line of reasoning, once a strongest class or build is discovered, all other builds are discarded in favor of that superior one. I'm pretty sure I remember games in D2 with classes other than hammerdin.

The biggest prove of what i'm saying is the reason why they felt the skill tree was a bad design. The skill tree totally fill it's role if you think the game is about character building and progression. Firebolt must be learned before fireball, thats the way mages learn spells (weaker ones before the fancy ones). It doesn't matter if firebolt becomes useless later on. Now if the game is about beign efficient and choose wisely all the times, the skill tree/synergy system blows.

You still learn skills in a certain order. You can't get the higher level ones before the lower level ones. For my above barbarian:

Start off with bash and ground stomp, cause they're skills all barbarians acquire. Then add or replace them with the following:

Battle Rage->Frenzy->Wrath of the Berserker
Leap Attack->Furious Charge->Whirlwind

Tbh honest, 'im 100% happy with the change. This skill systen is all I ever wanted since 2008. But i can understand why people more interested in other aspects of the game are unhappy.

I really like the skill system too. Still don't see how there isn't character building.

Quote from TheDerpalator

A bit Hannibal Lecter if you're referring to the red-head.

Both the Hoodies are sweet, i haven't spent money on clothes in years and im considering buying the Tyrael

Look alright, I saw no one else had posted and didn't have time to think of good material.


I DIDN'T HAVE TIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIME!

Quote from italofoca

Now you`re beign arrogant. You`re just saying that the insatisfaction of many fans are ilogical... Dude there are plenty of good arguments against the deathmatch pvp, the RMAH, the new skill system, etc...

To be fair, I've heard 0 good arguments against TDM, maybe some valid points against the AH? (MAYBE), and nothing really persuasive against the skill system.

To be honest, I support many of those changes but i totally understand people who don`t. As they implement those new features, there are old features beign scraped. Ex: the skill system. Diablo 3 just lost the character building aspect. Right now the skill system is almost identical to the one used in guildwars and anyone that played guildwars know that the game does not have an character building feel in it. It`s more about strategics and tatics, less about role playing and character creation. So if you value role playing over strategy you SHOULD be sad about this change.

I disagree that diablo has lost the character building aspect. While skill points may have been important for casters, they were less so for physical classes. Having 20 pts in WW and a normal weapon meant you were #$%^ed in higher NM or hell, while a gearless sorc could get away with spamming her 20pt spell and be okay.

I mean, I guess I don't understand how having say, 3 sorcs, one meteor, one lightning, and one FO is more meaningful than having one sorc that you can switch between those skills and the appropriate gear for each. I'm assuming that each of the specs will have different preferred stats. Its not like you WEREN'T getting skill points with each of those sorcs, the only real difference between one and the other was, from a high level, what skills they used and gear they had. The same is true now for any wizard spec.

Personally, I would have had more "on" in the "on and off" i've played diablo over the years if I didn't have to roll another character to try out a different set of abilities.

About this same subject, theres one thing that i find really damn funny. When the skill trees were announced back in 2008, I was disapointed and said I expected an system more based on D1 (every clas having access to all possible skills at once). Now they are doing that! But the funny thing is: when i pronounced my opnion back there people called me an troll. Now the same people is supporting the points i made back in 2008 just because it is writen in blue!

Well, if that's the case its at least mildly hypocritical. I could see a few theoretical differences in why they may have reacted differently to your suggestion than to how they are now, but since I don't know what either you or they said exactly I won't bother getting in to it.

When people judge the mensager instead of the mensage, something is wrong.

I can definitely agree to that.

I forget who said it, but just because you can buy gear doesn't mean that as soon as you hit 60 you can go epix urselv out.

Rarity of High-End Gear + People Keeping It For Themselves + Massive Demand = either MASSIVE prices, or non-availability.

If you want to spend 10k on getting the best in every slot within the first year of the game, feel free.

I'd cut and sew THAT.

Quote from iopla

So ok, lets make it this way:

does ticket buyn' to basketball, football etc. game effects score?
does banana buyin effect basketball, football game?

Those questions? No. They aren't analogous questions though.

Does money spent on coaches/trainers/equipment effect the scores of games? Yes.

Does that make any of the people playing in those games anything less than the best of the best (for the pro leagues)? No.

Does the fact that some players have more resources to spend on training or equipment make the game less enjoyable when you are playing 2 hand touch with your family on a family get together? I would hope not.

Quote from iopla

Guys its A GAME.

So are football, basketball, baseball, hell the stock market is a game.

If you are enjoying what you're doing money is an afterthought.

Quote from Simpy7

A thought for the grey unattuned rune that would roll a random color when inserted (if that was what JW was talking about.) Would that mean there is only one kind of level 7 rune able to drop? Let's say the droprate is 0.1%. Would not the droprate be 0.1%/5 if there were 5 kinds of level 7 runes (crimson, alabaster, indigo etc.) and the chance for you to get the level 7 crimson rune for your skill be the same regardless of system?

Short answer: yes, it would be .1%/5.

Long answer: There are a couple of ways they could go about it, but lets say they want any given rune type (of level 7) to have a drop chance of 1 in 5,000,000. They could either do this by having the colored rune drop, already identified as a color (lvl 7 alabaster rune) or have <unidentified> level 7 runes drop 1 in 1,000,000 and then have the rune type be decided (out of 5 possible types) when you ID it.

In aggregate it would amount to the same thing.

Quote from Simpy7

Furthermore when he says that you have plenty of lvl 1 runes to "experiment on" that makes really no sense if it would be completely random. Because no matter how much you experiment on lvl 1 runes you will never know which of the 5 "rune-classes" you will get with a higher level rune. On the other hand if he means that "grey and generic" means no tooltip, no affixes you could learn that an indigo rune into magic missiles will always give you the magic missile splitting effect.

The experimentation referred to is finding out what type of rune effect you want on your abilities. Once you know the general effect, you will know which higher level runes to keep and which to sell/trade/salvage.

There were 2 systems being talked about, so i think the "indigo" and "splitting" phrases were being used relatively interchangably.

Quote from Dezarius

My question is this rather, -why- would anyone opt to use the RMAH when you could simply use the gold AH to buy ? If you could simply sell for RM and buy with gold, is that even a dilemma for anyone ? Hence making this discussion obsolete. That's what I'm not getting.

It is true that a lot of people around here say that. However, keep in mind that even if everyone here who said that, did that, all people on the df forums are among the "hardcore" d3 fans. We are the vast minority. All the other people out there playing this game might like the idea of "oh man, i don't have to spend <large> hours killing monsters to get <item up for sale for $3>? let me get my credit card."

Once enough people have invested any money at all, it means that there is more money in the system, and whoever just sold that item will now be willing to spend some of that money within the AH, thus creating a flow of cash from the original investment

Additionally, goldsinks MAY make gold more valuable in that people will spend x dollars for y gold, and with sufficiently large values of gold, this is more efficient than selling said items on the cash AH.

i.e. you can sell 5 items taht come to a total off $100, but you pay the listing and transaction fee 5 times. If you instead sell those items on the gold AH, you pay that listing fee once. (i don't know if gold auctions will have the listing and transaction fees. i am assuming not). And even if those 5 items are for your weekly free listings, you still have to pay the transaction fee.

TLDR: Everyone (most people) reading these forums is more willing to spend time than money on D3, and is a minority of the population, when the majority of the population will probably find itself willing to spend some money to save time.