Unlocking Transmog Item Looks Details


Last week Blizzard shared all that info about how DiabloWikiTransmog will work via the Mystic in Reaper of Souls, but of course there were a few minor details not covered. One of those is the seemingly-weird question of finding items now, leaving them unidentified, and then ID’ing them in RoS, thus “earning” that item’s appearance via the Mystic.

does this mean even unidentified pre-2.0 items will not unlock the skins?

2) After patch 2.0, will we unlock skins only through self-found identified legendaries/set items, or will we be able to acquire unidentified items through trade and then ID them ourselves to unlock the skins?
Vaeflare: We’re still working out the details of Transmogrification and the full scope of the items it impacts.

Cheese_platterFor your first question, right now identified Legacy Legendary items will not unlock an appearance, but we’re still debating what to do with unidentified Legacy Legendary items.

For your second question, we’re also still discussing if we should put any restrictions on unlocking appearances for non-Legacy Legendaries (i.e. whether we’ll require you to both loot and identify the item to unlock its appearance, or if you just need to identify it). So, we don’t have firm answers to either of your questions just yet, but we’ll be sure to let you know just as soon as we do. 🙂

What are the new materials needed, and how are they obtained?
Vaeflare: Those details are still being worked out as well. Once they’re more finalized, we’ll let you know! 🙂

This is lame. Of course items found now shouldn’t unlock the Transmog look in RoS, months in the future. That’s so cheesy it should come with a glass of wine. It’s also pointless and silly beyond achievement-hounds desperate to rack up all the Transmog credits a day after release, since legendaries are going to much more frequently in DiabloWikiLoot 2.0/RoS than they do now.

Still, I feel strongly that a bonus tied to items in the expansion should only apply to items you find in the expansion. You’re free to disagree, and if you do may I recommend a nice fruity California viognier and a slice of baguette to complete your snack?

Tagged As: | Categories: Blizzard People, Blue Posts, Transmogrify

Comments

You're not logged in. Register or login to post a comment.
  1. I for one disagree with you.

    Unlocking the different looks doesn’t give any in game advantages, it’s only a vanity feature. I don’t see the problem with allowing existing identified items to automatically unlock that particulal look for your character. I’d just plain unlock all the looks of currently owned (or perhaps currently equiped) items when they roll out the patch that introduces transmogrification.

    Another option that could be done in addition or instead is to start keeping track now of items that have been identified so there is a record of unlocked legendaries at the start of RoS. Perhaps they already have some of this information already.

    Anyway, they’ll be adding loads more items and looks in RoS so it’s not like people will be able to unlock everything in one day.

  2. I’m totally with you on that one Flux.

    And I think traded legendaries shouldn’t unlock visuals either. The idea of slowly unlocking everything as you loot it really adds to the experience in my opinion. If you can do that via trading then the whole process loses a lot of it’s appeal.

    But perhaps I’m bias as I love any type of collection mechanics in games.

  3. I’m with you on this one Flux.

    Legendary items are going to have very different drop rates compared to what we have now. Perhaps some will be easier to get, but I also think there will be some legendary items which are completely the opposite and be very rare. This will be a “trophy” or achievement in itself trying to acquire these items, which will b e super fun as far as the loot hunt goes for collectors.

    If current legendary items unlocked the visual it would make for a very stale implementation of the transmog feature overall.

  4. Funny how americans prefer cepage wine over terroir wine.

  5. I’m not disagreeing with your basic point, but there are ramifications other than achievements. How these two questions are answered could have a decent-sized impact on the game.

    For the first question the blue refers to: If they were to decide to let unidentified Legacy Legendaries unlock an appearance, it would make certain unidentified Legacy Legendaries very valuable. The ability to have the aesthetic look of a favorite item without having to wait to find it will be valuable to someone.

    Take it from someone who has played the console exclusively since launch (and keep in mind that the devs keep referring to the console version as an example of how drops will work in Loot 2.0), while you do see many, many more Legendaries, looking for a specific Legendary can take some patience. Consider also that they will be adding many new Legendaries with the expansion, requiring more patience. A lack of said patience tends to equal trade value.

    If any of those Legacy Legendaries aren’t carried forward, or are aesthetically altered, there’s another chance to find some value. The ability to carry unidentified items from D3C to RoS could prove quite profitable. It may not sound like much now, but considering that the economy is about to change dramatically… we all know that there are a certain percentage of players who will be looking for any edge they can get in whatever new economy springs up. These little speculative leaps could pay off big. Or completely flop. But then again, there is very little risk involved.

    As for the second question: If they only require a player to ID an item in order to unlock its appearance, rather than requiring them to also loot the item, it would add potential value to unidentified Legendaries. In this system, if you traded for a Legendary you would not unlock its appearance. But if you traded for an unidentified Legendary you would unlock the appearance when you ID the item. This has the potential to create a market for unidentified Legendaries.

    I should address that both of thee scenarios depend on transmogrification being a popular feature. In my opinion, it is almost certain that it will be popular enough to create some level of demand. And if we end up with a barter-based system, even a niche demand can be very lucrative.

    Again, these are both speculative ideas based on potential implications on a system where there are still many unknown variables. In other words, a total guess. But the point is that people will make these kind of guesses, and these decisions can sometimes signal opportunity if you’re willing to read between the lines and make a blind leap or two (and those blind leaps are lucky and deliver you to safe ground).

    Just to be clear, I’m against the decisions that would make these two scenarios possible. I’m just trying to point out that there could be bigger consequences than just achievements.

  6. If they remove the fact that we know the legendary before it is identified, which were demanded by some fans, I doubt we will see unidentified legendaries available for trading.
    If they let us stock unidentified legendaries for identification within a year, the inventory space will be a big issue.

  7. I can almost guarantee that legacy unidentified items will not unlock the item’s visual for transmog.

    However, I can see giving unidentified loot 2.0 items the ability to unlock the visual even if traded for. I think this would be a popular and healthy market.

  8. Why the hell are we still talking about IDs? Get rid of IDing, it’s an extra chore for no benefit. That little “opening your present” feeling is a myth, that comes when you actually sit and read all of the affixes on whatever it was you picked up. And the game world should be dangerous and hectic enough that you can’t read anything unless you’re back in town, anyway.

  9. QUOTE

    And the game world should be dangerous and hectic enough that you can't read anything unless you're back in town, anyway.

    Like… monster respawn?

Comments are closed.