Blue Posts on Armor Dye, WoW/D3 Chat, and more

Continuing our survey of recent Blue posts on the EU forums, here are a few more on various issues.

Can you use two DiabloWikiArmor Dyes on the same item? To get cool multi-colored effects?

Unfortunately, placing say, red with black and gold on a single item is not possible. You will only be able to use one single dye on an item at a time.

Why don’t destructibles hurt players?

…it shows the hero/champion hit a wall down onto a group of zombies and the wall big heavy wall lands on the hero/champion but it doesnt kill or even injure the hero/champion i think if your under a wall it would hurt just a little…
To touch on this topic, this was actually a concept that we looked into and we did try to play around with it for a while, but unfortunately it did not work out as well as we would have hoped. We have major concerns that allowing debris to damage players will end up as a means for griefers to disrupt or discourage group play. 🙁

This unfortunately means that we will not be implementing such a system for the foreseeable future

In previous Blizzcon demos, the destructibles were destructive. If you dropped a chandelier, or knocked out a wall support, you had to get out of the way or you’d take damage and possibly even get stunned. Obviously someone’s mother in one of their internal test groups found that confusing, since it was removed from the game before the beta.

A fan wanted to know if he would be able to play Diablo 3 and WoW on the same account at the same time.

The way the Battle.Net system works is that it simply consolidates all of your accounts into one easily manageable overview. This allows you to manage all of your accounts in one simple location. You can access every single one of your accounts that are on the Battle.Net account simultaneously without any issues, but you would need on beast of a computer to run both WoW and Diablo III on max settings together :p

out of interest, how does it handle cross-game chat, via realID? which one recieves the messages? :P</font<
If this occurs, then a meteor from the fourth dimension crashes into the data transmission causing the data to be split into multiple pieces flying off into outer space and face planting onto each of the accounts that you are logged into at the same time! O.O

This roughly translates to, it will be received by all of the accounts that you are logged into at that point :p

Related to this article
  • New Armor Dye Gallery
  • Dyes on Rare and Legendary Items

  • You're not logged in. Register or login to post a comment.

    33 thoughts on “Blue Posts on Armor Dye, WoW/D3 Chat, and more

    1. why is blizzard so concerned about griefers. fuck this shit. let there be griefers, what the hell. its none of their concern, if people like griefing then let it be
      fuck blizzard

      • Because it can potentially keep people from playing co-op? That IS their concern. A very big one at that. Imagine the nerdrage that would ensue if someone’s HC character was lost due to some douche knocking a wall down on them (on purpose or accident). Griefers will find other ways to be douchebags, don’t worry.

        • so your ok with blizzard babysitting players? do you cry to momma or try to sue blizzard when someone griefs you? the feeling of danger to being in a party with people you dont know is part of the fun
          if this type of shit keeps going on this game will be a big turd

          • One of the most rewarding aspects of meeting such power-macho-solo-tough-nomomma-hardcore men on the internet… is “their”.

            I mean, when they write “so your OK” or “your a barbarian”, it just makes me grin and be happy. They are so manly and lone-wolf… Ooops, sorry, I meant THEIR so manly and lone-wolf, that you just can’t help thinking THEIR very clever, mature and wise. Really, that life experience just shows through.

            I bow to you.

          • No, I simply don’t play co-op with people I don’t know and trust. That’s not what Blizzard wants. The “feeling of danger” should be coming from the monsters and environment, not from the people you are teamed up with.

            It’s probably pointless to even try to explain this to you and your griefing ilk, but I will try. Blizzard has a specific goal in mind. That is to make hardcore gamers out of casual ones. This is a marketing strategy designed to do what companies do – make money. One of the ways they try to do this is to encourage co-op play. Anything that discourages co-op play (i.e. various methods of griefing) is in danger of being removed.

            Would it be realistic to have debris also damage players caught in the way? Sure. The problem is that there are douchebags who would abuse this to make the game less fun for others. So when you wonder why it isn’t in the game, look no further than yourself and your griefing ways. That is why. This type of shit keeps the game from being a big turd.

        • There’s actually a very simple solution for this.

          Make destructibles destructed by your character hurt your character. If another player destructs something, then it only hurts them and the monsters.

          Griefing averted.

    2. “Obviously someone’s mother in one of their internal test groups found that confusing, since it was removed from the game before the beta.”
      Oh Flux, thou art more bitter and more cynical…
      I doubt the problem was accessibility (or “mother factor”), but rather that you only need a few griefers to do it to make people mistrust their fellow players around such situations. Just try to imagine it, you get a chandelier on your head and a fellow group member falls over laughing while you get killed by mobs.
      Stuff like that produces very fond memories for the future, and very frustrating moments in the presence and the possibility that said person might choose to stay out of public games altogether as they are entirely optional, thus hurting co-op. I think that Blizzard learned the right lessons from their other games; if you don’t give people the option of fucking up their team mates, they will actually get along nicely (well, most of the time), but as soon as you allow it, hostility ensues.

      • I think you are glossing over the issue he pointed out.  

        The developers have a habit of removing something entirely, rather than just balancing appropriately.  There are a number of ways you could balance this feature with next to no further development time and still allow the cool part to be in the game, while yanking the ‘griefer’ aspect entirely.  

        A few examples would be: 1. Let it hurt you but only down to say 25% health.  2. Someone else mentioned, let it hurt you if you did it, but not if someone else did. 3. Make the damage percentage based, say 10% current health.  If you are low you won’t die that way.

        Those could each be added to the game with literally 1 line of code.  Certainly there are options that are better than others, but blizzard made no effort, instead they just yanked the feature, which I think most people could probably agree was pretty cool to start out with.   

        This brings us back to “Obviously someone’s mother in one of their internal test groups found that confusing, since it was removed from the game before the beta.”  This has been a nasty habit of blizzards during the  development of Diablo 3.  They have tended to remove anything that wasn’t so easy to understand 70 year old women who don’t even have computers could figure out.

      • I’m just cynical and snarky, not bitter. About d3, anyway.

        It’s not just a joke though, and it’s not out of nowhere, since someone, IIRC it was Bashiok, said their mom had played the game and hadn’t liked or understood something, which had later been removed or nerfed. (That I’m so vague on teh memory is evidence that I don’t totally obsess over this stuff?)

    3. I suspect the destructibles not damaging PCs also has something to witht he fact it punishes melee characters more than ranged ones – a melee character would have to be very careful with any aoe near destructible walls.

    4. “Obviously someone’s mother in one of their internal test groups found that confusing, since it was removed from the game before the beta.”
      Flux <3 I hate it that blizzard designs this game for casual idiots who most of them wont even botter playing this game after finishing normal difficulty..

      • Ya know, I think its worse than that. They seem to be developing this game for the far extremes at this point.  

        I mean think about it.  When you were 10, could you have figured this stuff out.  I think I could have.  Maybe I’m give myself too much credit, but I think at age 10 or so, I would be able to figure this game out without all the simplification they have gone through.

        Heck, any teenager that has ever picked any video game up in their lives should be able to figure D3 out.  Even though this game is ‘going to be rated mature’  they are simplifying it for 10 > year olds.

        My dad (in his 50s)  and step-brother (9)  have been playing starcraft 2 since it came out.  They play it without any sort of problem understanding the game,  so who is Diablo 3 really being designed for.. 60 70 80+ year olds?People that are not going to pick the game up because THEY DON’T VIDEO PLAY GAMES?

    5. I doubt anyone got confused. I’m pretty sure they knew exactly what was going on, and played accordingly (if you drop that wall on your buddy at the right time, you get more loot!)

    6. As long as debris and destructibles don’t one-shot players, why take the damage out? Diablo 2 had exploding barrels, fires, fire shrines, and other nasty traps. As Max Schaefer said about Diablo and Torchlight: the whole game is set up to kill the player. With the current visuals, falling rocks etc., it seems like environment damage should be part of this “kill the player” equation.

      • I think I would take it as granted that if the D2 team put physics in D2, and they hurt the player, they would have ridiculous scaling and be able to one-shot a character in Hell.

        There’s plenty of ways to hurt the player with the environment. There’s more traps in D3, and they’re much more grand and elaborate, than what was in D2. They are also actual traps –not a barrel that mysteriously explodes when you punch it. The traps in D3 (which aren’t really seen in the beta) are quite fitting, and actual constructions, such as a tree that’s kept up by a rope, and the trunk has other limbs put through it and sharpened into stakes. When the player runs over a tripwire, they trigger this trap. Just as an example.

        There’s a lot more problems with destructibles in general causing damage to the player, griefing being the least of the issues. This is one decision that I can stand behind because it actually makes sense.

    7. how much can a falling wall or chandelier actually hurt ?

      I’m ok with fighting 20 zombies at once and fighting freaking giant demons, but I don’t want to get hit by a falling chandelier ?

      If I’m past level 30 and a chandelier can do any noticeable damage to me then something’s wrong with the game

      • Indeed. And if it doesn’t cause damage, or the damage is negligible, than what is the point of it to begin with?
        And why have a form of attack in the game that can’t really be mitigated outside of dodging?
        Some of the destructibles are quite large, and the player wouldn’t even be able to dodge them.

        But I’m sure we’ll see stuff like falling boulders or whatever in a boss fight that will damage the player.

        • I see where you are coming from here Red, but something I don’t understand is why take the easy route.

          If they are going to take the time to add all this stuff, and then balance boss fights with destructibles and such, why just yank damage completely in this fashion.  Blizzard is all about polish, and at least from my perspective, this is an easy area where they can add a bit of realism and polish without spending too much development time. 

          In the grand scheme of things, how hard would it be to add say a percentage of current health damage system to these things, and then not allow griefers to kill you with it.  They have re done several of the game systems multiple times, but wont take the relatively lower about of time to leave this in the game.  That seems to be a cop out to me.

          • I’m not sure you understand. The damage to monsters is still in the game. What was removed was the damage (and possible stun) to the player. Notice the word “removed”. This was already in the game, and isn’t due to laziness/lack of development time.
            By this logic, if you are standing in your wizard’s meteor, you should take damage. Why isn’t this so? Because it discourages co-operative play. The point is, there are plenty of ways for you to die in this game. Friendly fire simply does not need to be one of them.

            • I do understand, I didn’t mean to write a confusing post.
              I do understand that the feature was removed, and I think that is a cop out on blizzards part.  I think the damage and/or stun would add an element of realism to the destructible environment and would welcome that as a PvE player.
              My question to Risingred was essentially “if they took the time to code all this into the game already, why take the easy route out and axe simply because they didn’t want to balance it.”

              The blue post stated they removed the PvE damage aspect due to a possible griefer issue.  As has been mentioned several times in the comments there are easy ways to balance this PvE damage/stun and at the same time remove the griefing issue.  I am talking about including the PvE aspect of the destructible, while removing the PvP (griefing) aspect.  It just seems like a cop out to me.
              Additionally I would point out that if the griefing aspect were successfully removed from the game, while maintaining the PvE aspect, that would infact incourage co-op as people would look out for each other — “hey this is gonna fall there watch out”  that type of thing.

    8. Damn,
      It’d be awesome to be in a SC2 game and suddenly the whole team hears the message:

      “Diablo walks the earth”

    9. The last post is amusing… I’ve logged into WoW and Sc2 before and yes you recieve messages from real id people in both games at the same time (as in you would see what a person said to you twice, one in the chat box in WoW and another in an individual chat in Sc2 or in the purple text during a game) but you can only see the things you said in the game you said it in… So if I respond to them in the Sc2 chat window, I won’t see that text in WoW… Also they see the icon of whatever game they are also in on their friends list (so if they were in WoW and you logged into Sc2 first, it would show the Sc2 icon by your name on their friends list until you logged into WoW and then it would change to that with your location in the game under it)… I’m guessing this will all work the same in relation to Diablo 3 except that it probably won’t open individual chat windows like in Sc2 since it seems like you have more of a WoW style chat box both in and out of games in Diablo 3…

    10. Man, some of you guys are total pussies.  As if it weren’t enough for you to be afraid of getting ganked, you’re now afraid of taking damage from falling debris?  Really?

      Maybe they should take character shadows out of the game since you’re probably scared of those too.

      • Lol at “ganked”. “Ganking” has no place in D3 as it is a co-op game, and is the exact thing developers want to prevent. Sorry, guy, you’re going to have to find a different way to be a douchebag. I’m sure you’ll think of something.

        • I would point out that “Ganking” or PvP in general has had an integral part in every blizzard game, including both previous diablos.

          The D3 team has indicated that they are now stripping PvP from D3, and there are those of us that would still like it as part of D3

          If you take a look at the previous poll you will notice a good chunk of the visitors to the sight would like some sort of PvP other than just arena.  I would also speculate that had there been a few more options, or the options worded slightly better, that the numbers of PvP advocates could have been much higher.

          • Integral in Diablo for whom? Griefers, perhaps. It is allowed/supported in other Blizzard games because they have separate factions. Diablo is strictly a co-operative game. Alliance can’t attack other alliance in WoW. SC is the same. Why should it be so in D3?
            I can see how people may want more PvP than just the arena, but to me, this is a different thing entirely. It has nothing to do with PvP, and everything to do with griefing.

            • The griefing aspect can easily be removed, please read above.

              I would point out to you that there was a community in Diablo/Diablo 2 that was involved in PvP.  There were some people that enjoyed ‘the hunt’, or even killing ‘the hunter.’  There was also an active dueling community.  Many of these issues have been discussed in depth on this site.  The thrill of the toggle PvP has also been recently mentioned by Xanth in one of his hardcore articles.

              Some of us would like options similar to how they were included previous games.  Not to say those systems couldn’t be improved.  Diablo has never been strictly co-op.  There may be a number of people that play it that way, but there are also a good number of people that played other ways.

    11. Would people please stop dissing mothers and grandmothers?! There are some awesomely sophisticated gamers who also happen to be mothers and grandmothers!
      Way to be BOTH sexist AND agist at once ><

      I'm looking at you, Flux, but yes Bashiok did it too :p

    Comments are closed.