Quote from maka
Quote from shaggy
That sounds pretty much like what we would have expected with this many people playing for 3 1/2 months now and very little in terms of items being removed from the economy, though... right?
Not if there was no AH.
Because D2-style trading is such a hassle, it's only really worth doing when dealing with rare and super-rare stuff, leaving the players to find their own mid-level gear, which is much more satisfying than buying it.
So your complaint is "I don't want to be forced to use the AH." And your solution is "force anyone who uses the AH to play my way."
Not a bit of hypocrisy there at all.
2
I take it you haven't played since the patch?
The game is more like Diablo 2 than ever, the good parts of Diablo 2 at least. Nothing about the game reminds me of WoW (which I never liked). And the team at Blizzard has pretty much bent over backwards to re-shape the game to this point in what? A couple months?
I just don't think that critique makes much sense now without some measure of example and useful anecdote to back it up.
2
It's a bit early to speculate on the expansion, no? I think Daemaro has the most likely solution, but there's plenty of time to come up with others. Take your pick.
I like more players to enjoy the game with. Do you think it was wrong of Blizzard to do something popular?
I've always found a trauma wrap better for wounds than free-bleeding to the hospital, especially when the treatment is uncertain.
I can't imagine why they would wipe something that time consuming, especially considering they did this to please the fanbase. Assuming they aren't out to get us and the levels somehow or other persist, it wouldn't be terrifyingly difficult for them to adjust drop rates as needed.
Then I bemoan both your miserable pessimistic outlook on life and your lack of foresight (or hindsight if you consider this essentially re-dubs Diablo 2 and the long trek to 99 back into the game). Of course, nobody knows the future, so you may well be right. Then again, if we go far enough into the future there will be more major patches with which to address any upcoming problems. If we go further on down the line we will have expansion(s). So, assuming trouble does come of this: they have more than enough time to get in front of it and they are showing us now their willingness to do so.
How dare they elaborate on good ideas from such a spurious source? Honestly the progenitor of the system means nothing to me. Name-dropping fails to impress me out in the real world, least of all here in the you-tube-streaming substrata of casual rpg gaming. I think we've been over why it was a good idea and why it doesn't really matter what the long-er term is at this point, but sufficed to say these sentences don't really accomplish much.
I think it was a much-needed shot of Diablo 2 in to the game. It opened up the entirety of the game to the vast majority of the player base who were struggling, allowed everyone a discernible path of improvement for quite a long time which did not detract from their item hunt, but in-fact made that hunt more efficient over time. In short: It made peace with quite a few issues that many loyal fans had all at once. Yes, it also brought about the ire of others and I can only imagine the reasons they (I would say "you," but I don't have to imagine your complaints since they are both plain to see and addressed above) came up with to dislike this addition to the game, but from what I can see on these boards and the official ones that group is a much smaller minority than the detractors pre-patch.
TL;DR: Blizzard did well. It's too soon to worry about the long-term.
1
They don't like Jay Wilson and they want to run his name through the mud as much as possible, pretty simple.
As to why this thread is still alive, I have no idea, but I would assume the mods here think a clone would pop up and conspiracy theories thrown around like wildfire if they did.
Best to just ignore it and let the gossip girls get their fill.
2
I wouldn't be so quick to pin the problem on a lack of sound diversity because, as far as I remember, many of the bands you and I both mentioned made a habit of borrowing each others' ideas, sounds, and style. What I think sets this generation, and I use that phrase ever-so-loosely since it spans a few decades, of music apart from the giants of my time is the fact it's now all so uninspiring.
In the post-war (second world war) era, there was so much gravitas coming from the blues community and the fledgling rock/folk types like Cash. They elevated the issues of racial tension that really tapped our civil right's struggles. They pulled no punches mocking political figures and decrying the inadequacy of some legal failings of the day. They even made light of the red scare when it was in full swing. To date, I do not believe any musician has displayed that kind of courage and it really does come across. The last time I can recall a modern band with a serious social/political thrust to their music it was the ho-hum repetitive ballads of Green Day bemoaning the situation of upper-middle-class children.
During the 60's and 70's, the era with which I feel the most kinship, our music was almost entirely driven by the blooming civil rights movement, the Vietnam war, the upset with the Kennedy administration (many people forget that back then, criticism of politicians wasn't so partisan: we called republicans and democrats on their injustices with an even hand), Nixon, and our international parade of government toppling to deny communists the same pleasure. I think the closes modern equivalent was the very early rap music scene where the social injustice of the inner city post white-flight was really brought to the forground in a new sound. I was never a fan of Run DMC or Ice Cube, but I could still listen to some of their music and appreciate the feeling that went into making it was legitimate.
As the 70's rolled on into the 80's and 90's things began to dilute in a hurry. Once Collins, Springsteen, and the like had more or less exhausted their re-vamp of the folk-era in rock format the convservative moral majority had begun to make serious inroads into censorship. Music, admittedly, by this point had become more "vulgar," in the most literal sense, but I think that was more a means of establishing new identities than simply shocking the audience. However; this excuse was used and reckoned to a veritable drum-beat by the convseratives and by the late 90's music on the radio had been bleached and pressure washed to such an extent that new sounds simply couldn't arise with the same volume they had in the past. Metal was, I think, the best response music came up with to this, but American metal music went insane while the Europeans really defined it into a rail against cold-war American enterprise abroad.
Fast forward to the present day where censorship has become more relaxed and I think the issue is now with people and artists finding a common theme. There had been so much time in that era of white-washed 90's rock where we thought nobody would ever bring back a new 1969 that it appeared to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Techno revived the lumpen-awful that was disco. New rap bastardized the revolution that was the original hip-hop. Then, to top it all off, the "alternative," beat became the worst of both worlds: Inherently meaningless, aimed at an affluent audience, and celebrating/protesting nothing in particular.
tl;dr: There are very few bands these days with a voice. They are concerned with their sound or identifying themselves in some esoteric way, but at the end of the day it's easier than ever to simply emulate than it was before. What will bring about the next wave of "good," music is anyone's guess, but I suspect that it will require people in the music industry to tap back into the pleasure and the unrest of society and stop trying to lead it by the nose. The very term "pop," as in "popular," music makes me want to smash recording studio equipment.
1
I have to agree with the reddit sleuth here.
1
It's no secret the posting quality around here has plummeted to an all-time low. Even with the oncoming patch, which some detractors have grudgingly accepted as positive, there are a small but persistent group of antagonistic persons who are flooding our boards with the same tired message: The game is irreparably broken, the problems are all systemic, the RMAH is all that blizzard cares about, etc. They offer no solutions, they tear down anyone who claims to still enjoy the game.
We have all replied to their posts or one of their off-topic rants within another, often promising, thread. We have all seen the cancerous ruin spread from Diablo III General Discussion to every other sub-forum. We have all nearly exhausted our patience trying to make them see how unreasonable their arguments are, or simply stop posting on a forum dedicated to a game they passionately hate.
We all know there will be things about the game we dislike. There is no perfect solution to any problem that makes everyone happy all the time. There is never an inappropriate time to air a gripe, legitimacy be damned, BUT and I must stress the BUT the presence of pile-on repeat-posts of the same completely irrational conspiratorial arguments have absolutely gone overboard. When you can type a response to one such post and proceed to copy/paste it a dozen times in as many different threads, all of which are on the first page of these boards, there is a problem.
So what do you personally think about the current forum environment? Take the poll and feel free to leave a comment detailing your opinions on the matter.
4
I welcome this sentiment. I hope more people who've got it out for D3 take this route and stop polluting the forums.
1
At this point that guess would be almost purely speculative. We've had a preview that is a "this is what we're working on," not "here and the patch notes." Arbitrarily assuming that zbears builds will be inefficient based on current napkin math and furthermore assuming it will continue to be the best build for the job of farming content is not a rational response at this point.
Indeed, VQ was used to gain parity because the base regen of mana was too low. It has been improved and it may yet be improved again. Now that VQ has been changed (not removed) into a more readily accessible tool (rather than something which shapes 4 of your 6 active skills) it -should- allow the WD to gain a lot more ground relative to other classes.
The reason players are complaining is because they've taken incomplete information and assumed it to be the "whole picture." The same people often wonder why blizzard is hesitant to release information about what they're working on. The answer is obviously this very phenomenon. You don't know that it will take you longer to clear the same content with the same builds. You don't even know if there will be more and in-fact better builds out there after the patch.
3
The stench of blind conservatism is nauseating.
1
Yes, that is great. It means more viable builds. Variety keeps the game interesting.
I'd wager most of the devs are playing inferno since pretty much everyone can by now and it's very important to most players by extension. I feel quite sorry for you if there's nothing appealing in the class after one build is (marginally) nerfed from godhood to mere immortal.
They aren't "killing" anything and they made that quite clear. Math might not be your strong suit, but rest assured those of us who can use a calculator have confirmed their new coefficient allows for moderately geared wizards to continue on spewing tornadoes with the same results. Again, if you don't like the rest of the skills then you don't have to use them. Just realize that much is your own very conservative opinion.
It is a drop in the bucket when the build remains just as powerful with marginally more crit chance. A real nerf would have been to dismantle the synergy entirely. Then you would be quite justified in pitching a fit.