If some people can't realise that the fun in this game is the hunt for items, and not necessarily having the items in your possession, then that's their loss.
With this statement you are just putting a foot in your mouth in so many ways. What is the goal of hunting for items if not to possess them? What is the goal of trading if not to posses even more items faster? Durr. If all the fun is supposedly in the item hunt then why do you want to trade instead of hunting for items? Durr again.
If anything, you're the one making a fool of yourself. It's clear that you just post and never read anyone else's opinion. My views on this and other subjects are pretty well known to anyone that has bothered to read my posts over time, so don't talk about things you know nothing about.
Where do you get off acting like an jerk? Durr yourself.
Sometimes i'm amazed at the inability of people to understand any point of view except their own--looks at dimebag. all while sounding like the cookie monster or some shit "arggh items, give me all the items, i must possess them, more items!"
Clearly the process of finding items and possessing them are both important and heavily related.
I'm excited about adventure mode, but I can't help but wonder how they will give players incentive to actually play the game (campaign), instead of just doing bounty runs.
The story is enough incentive to play the campaign. You won't find many of them here, but tons of players just play a game like this through once or twice and then move on to the next thing.
As Kripp said: Why would anybody play Rifts over Bounties?
Because the rifts look like a lot of fun.
I swear, it's like people seem to forget that this is a game, not a job.
Also rifts will probably be more challenging as a result, and so will require more skill/better thought out builds to deal with unpredictable challenges etc.
The changes they are making for the expansion are so significant that it's really a very very different game, i think the ladder will accomplish a fresh start if they implement it so wiping everything is not necessary, but i would not mind if my characters were wiped a fresh start seems appropriate since the gaming conditions will be so drastically changed.
You want options? If Blizzard made a separate mode for people who enjoy trading and $$$ transfers over good gameplay, you would be forced to play with a minority of the community. Yes, that's because people who are pro-BoA are the majority. I wouldn't mind though. The problem is - if they enabled trading in a separate game mode, they would have to decimate the drop rates (from what the current plan is) and that would probably make that game mode feel much less rewarding in comparison.
No, really, who cares if some people who trade "too much" finish out the game faster? The whole game should, and hopefully will, be based on making self-found enjoyable. The more enjoyable self-found is the less people will actually trade because they'll be having a great experience already - most self-found players already feel this way about the AH. The people who do trade will hit that wall and burn out and go away. The rest of us will trade here and there between our friends, possibly to get that last item we need to make our new build work, but nothing that would "ruin" the game.
We cannot have a game where design is dictated by the fear of people "abusing" trading or D2JSP or anything like that. We MUST demand a game that appeals to everyone because that's the foundation of D3. Diablo has been the "blue chip stock" of the ARPG landscape for almost 20 years now. When that's your position in the market you can't suddenly pull a 180 and start tying for niche appeal. You have to man up and live with the downsides of making a major game... and part of that is that 3rd party sites creep up because your game is popular.
People have been selling WoW gold for almost the whole duration of the game... and you know what? The game hasn't crumbled because of it. If anything, MoP drove lots of people away because, before any patches, Blizzard adopted a rather anti-alt stance which severely hurt the game. Why? Some people enjoyed playing alts when they weren't raiding on their mains. Other people claimed that alts were "too easy" to gear up and it should be harder. Blizzard agreed with the alt-haters, went down that road, and suddenly lost ~2 million subscribers. This should be a big lesson to the D3 developers - trying to socially-engineer WoW didn't work, and doing the same for D3 is going to cause more harm than good.
And that's the mistake Blizzard would be making. It's possible to cut back on "mass trading" and appease both groups without going this route.
Thats one of the first pro trading arguments made in this thread which is actually reasonable, I play self-found right now because the AH exists, but if there were an avenue to trade which actually required engaging with people i would probably do it occasionally just to change it up, i'm not a fan of BOA legendaries but i think it makes sense for enchanted items.--unless they could return to there original state-- when traded.
Once they make the self-found experience enjoyable i really see no reason for limiting trading in any sense, why should the game experience by held hostage to 3rd party traders etc.
Trading should be inefficient, unnecessary and time consuming as an overall means of gearing, but still valuable when your searching for niche items.
Bind to clan and or freindlist with no time restriction could be a nice solution.
Yeah, I think BoA is an item sink. Personally, I think it's something they needed from the get go, even if BoA isn't the best.
Now that they're dropping the AH (which is a pity, IMO, as other trading method is...terrible), I don't think they really need a BoA or something to denote self found. Even if you do trade for it, that probably means you found something of near equal value.
You just said it yourself, other means of trading are terrible. And I think it's already been established that the AH was also terrible in its own way. That's why they added BoA - to kill trading entirely and focus the game around the most fun way to find loot, which is self-found. If they didn't, some third party site would build something comparable to the AH and we would eventually be right back in the same position, with self-found players being second class citizens compared to those who traded for exactly what they wanted. We had that in D2 and it was awful.
The AH is not terrible. A lack of competitive currency is terrible. The AH is extremely useful and convenient. I see a core issue here..."most fun way to find loot"...yea what? huh? Quick question: Do you enjoy finding items or using items? Personally, I like using items. I don't diminish their value myself by saying "well I didn't FIND this item so I remain displeased, regardless of how much fun I will have now with its power."
One other question. Do you think that a self-found player should be able to compete with a socially active player in a similar time frame? As in, should 2 players, one who trades and one who plays self-found, have roughly the same gear and levels? Why or why not?
Im pretty sure most people like the experience of BOTH finding and using items.
There needs to be some mechanism that facilitates trading but clearly one that is not as good as the AH, although im not really a fan of the BOA decision.
It's important to prevent third parties and botters from ruining the gamplay and imo BOA ruins the gameplay for many people so i dont think its a good solution. A solution that did not negatively impact the gameplay of any players would be best.
so long as we dont have a situation where we are spammed with bot chat and other such dis-pleasurable things i could not care less about a third party trading sites.
sorry dude this is just one of those ridiculous efficiency craving ideas. The motivation is obvious, but this would totally ruin the enjoyment of random encounters.
You're right - you still got the drops. What I was thinking of was, if the enemy shattered it left no corpse, which meant you couldn't use the Find Item skill on it.
What is this "Find Item skill" of which you speak?
But you're right, shattered enemies left no corpse, which is why frost sorcs and summon necros did not get along very well.
Barb skill. Also, Find Potion.
lol at Find potion.----most pointless skill, -- ever.
People aquired wealth with their credit card in D2 just like in D3 (including me) and if you didn't buy your items, you just farmed for runes and scammed noobs untill you had enough to buy a good item off of someone who got it from a botter / duper / 3rd party site.
I played d2 quite alot, probably upwards of 1000 hours after my 3 or 4th ladder playthrough... i never purchased anything from a site i found 3 sojs and a 2 maras at least which are failry similar in there drop rate. and i made plenty of legit trades which were profitable for me and the other person.
there is no way of knowing how many items were duped or how many were not, so enough with the pure speculation and claims that everyone acquired there items through either scamming newbs or buying them off sites. Because its false.
I'm not saying it did not happen, what i am saying is that no-one has any way of knowing how many items were duped, but obviously it was not all of them, and self found was very viable.(single player)
consensus is a beautiful thing, sometimes you need to start with a higher level question before jumping into details haphazardly, maybe it's good enough to just say "more socketables would be nice" and let developers figure out the details.
Given that we have multiple sockets in some items i dont think the enchantress is a replacement, you could re-roll a socket affix for example trying to get additional sockets and still be left with the limited choice of gems to put into them.
Affixes themselves have some massive problems which are very well discussed but lets not let the Affix problem hinder discussion about Socketable's
Assuming a fixed affix system then i think 'jewls' which can randomly roll any affix and be inserted into any piece could work, i also think allowing 'jewls' to roll higher values for affixes relating to skill damage or elemental damage could be very interesting because it would create tradoffs against the big 4.
"Greater range of socket-able item types" means more items that can be put in sockets? Or more gear slots that can roll sockets (Belts, Bracers, rare Gloves, rare Boots)?
the intended meaning was items that can be inserted into sockets, since at the moment sockets cant be created no armor/weapons are socket-able was my train of thought. They can have sockets obvs but they dont have the ability to become socketed therefore not socketable.
There's certainly some ambiguity there though thanks for pointing that out!--updated poll q.
Yes, the D2 system was much better. But more socketable items would have the prerequisite of turning "socketed" into a base item type instead of a magic affix.
WoW's system was already dumbed down a lot and only introduced because they had to release a new profession.
Path of Exile deserves a mention for its very interesting system that combines sockets with skills. For example (for those who don't know it) you can combine a "Lightning Bolt" skill gem with a "Multiple Projectiles" skill gem and voilà you're shooting multiple lightning bolts. Yes, that's what the runes in D3 do, but you can combine more than just two gems
yeah i would like to see them do something cool or interesting and innovative with sockets, what they have now is a simple but solid foundation and i'm hoping they will build on it far more.
clearly they could incorporate this into the crafting system as well. making gems an element in crafting recipes which result in a new kind of socket-able would also act as a good gold sink.
0
0
Sometimes i'm amazed at the inability of people to understand any point of view except their own--looks at dimebag. all while sounding like the cookie monster or some shit "arggh items, give me all the items, i must possess them, more items!"
Clearly the process of finding items and possessing them are both important and heavily related.
0
0
0
Also rifts will probably be more challenging as a result, and so will require more skill/better thought out builds to deal with unpredictable challenges etc.
0
so yeah im neutral.
0
Thats one of the first pro trading arguments made in this thread which is actually reasonable, I play self-found right now because the AH exists, but if there were an avenue to trade which actually required engaging with people i would probably do it occasionally just to change it up, i'm not a fan of BOA legendaries but i think it makes sense for enchanted items.--unless they could return to there original state-- when traded.
Once they make the self-found experience enjoyable i really see no reason for limiting trading in any sense, why should the game experience by held hostage to 3rd party traders etc.
Trading should be inefficient, unnecessary and time consuming as an overall means of gearing, but still valuable when your searching for niche items.
Bind to clan and or freindlist with no time restriction could be a nice solution.
0
Im pretty sure most people like the experience of BOTH finding and using items.
There needs to be some mechanism that facilitates trading but clearly one that is not as good as the AH, although im not really a fan of the BOA decision.
It's important to prevent third parties and botters from ruining the gamplay and imo BOA ruins the gameplay for many people so i dont think its a good solution. A solution that did not negatively impact the gameplay of any players would be best.
so long as we dont have a situation where we are spammed with bot chat and other such dis-pleasurable things i could not care less about a third party trading sites.
0
0
lol at Find potion.----most pointless skill, -- ever.
0
I played d2 quite alot, probably upwards of 1000 hours after my 3 or 4th ladder playthrough... i never purchased anything from a site i found 3 sojs and a 2 maras at least which are failry similar in there drop rate. and i made plenty of legit trades which were profitable for me and the other person.
there is no way of knowing how many items were duped or how many were not, so enough with the pure speculation and claims that everyone acquired there items through either scamming newbs or buying them off sites. Because its false.
I'm not saying it did not happen, what i am saying is that no-one has any way of knowing how many items were duped, but obviously it was not all of them, and self found was very viable.(single player)
0
Given that we have multiple sockets in some items i dont think the enchantress is a replacement, you could re-roll a socket affix for example trying to get additional sockets and still be left with the limited choice of gems to put into them.
Affixes themselves have some massive problems which are very well discussed but lets not let the Affix problem hinder discussion about Socketable's
Assuming a fixed affix system then i think 'jewls' which can randomly roll any affix and be inserted into any piece could work, i also think allowing 'jewls' to roll higher values for affixes relating to skill damage or elemental damage could be very interesting because it would create tradoffs against the big 4.
0
0
the intended meaning was items that can be inserted into sockets, since at the moment sockets cant be created no armor/weapons are socket-able was my train of thought. They can have sockets obvs but they dont have the ability to become socketed therefore not socketable.
There's certainly some ambiguity there though thanks for pointing that out!--updated poll q.
0
yeah i would like to see them do something cool or interesting and innovative with sockets, what they have now is a simple but solid foundation and i'm hoping they will build on it far more.
clearly they could incorporate this into the crafting system as well. making gems an element in crafting recipes which result in a new kind of socket-able would also act as a good gold sink.