Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Support the site! Become a Diablo: IncGamers PAL - Remove ads and more!

Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

Discussion in 'Diablo 3 General Discussion' started by mouseman, Jul 8, 2008.

  1. mouseman

    mouseman IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    Do you still remember what it was like eight years ago when Diablo 2 came out and you knew next to nothing about the game? Do you remember what it was like being a newbie all confused about everything?

    I started thinking about Diablo 3 and how many people on this forum are against many changes in the sequel because they're different from Diablo 2. Many arguments are based on what people have gotten used to and not what's best for the game. I think it would be good for us all to look back and try to get a more objective point of view. This is why I wanted to start a thread about our first experiences in Diablo 2.

    I started out playing the single player because all I could remember from Diablo 1 were the duping and the PK'ing. I thought paladin was a melee-oriented character and ended up trying all the skills. Mostly because of this the game got really hard around Act 3 and I stopped playing it.

    Later I played the game with my brother and couple of friends playing a bowazon. Those sessions were a great succes even though we didn't get past the inner cloister area (before stairs to catacombs) in nightmare. We just continued from act4 to act1 nm straight without diablo-runs. The game got so hard that we ended up dying and not getting any XP. We quit playing the game.

    LoD came out, I bought it and went online because I lacked playing company. I somehow got into nm baalruns and levels started flowing. Just as I was getting excited I got scammed: the old "save your account and msg me your account name and password" wasn't so old back then and even newer to me. I lost everything and stopped playing again.

    I got back to it in 1.09, 1.10 and 1.11 because of my friends and some LAN parties. Tried HC a couple of times but was always pk'ed around lvl 30-50. Now I can handle the game and get the gear and what-not. But I still remember what it was like being a newbie.

    This is why I'm excited about hearing that there's no PK'ing without consent and that kind of things. I've listed some issues here that I see in the game now. A lot of people don't want these things to change because they are familiar with them.

    The trade system now is really hostile to casual players - even if you're not getting scammed, you have to rely on multiple outside-game sources to get your prices right. It takes a lot time out of the game. Hopping in and out of games is very frustrating when you can't sort what are trading games and what are not. You can't search for games. Gold based economy and action house type of system could be much a cleaner way to handle things.

    The specific character builds in combination with the specific gear makes the game quite easy. Those who don't know about these builds never get to the point that they can run bosses for items. They have no part in the economy or the battle.net community. When serious players are screaming for more difficulty, casual non-build players have a hard time getting past nightmare. Allowing people to respect at that point where you notice you've made a lot of mistakes would just save a lot of disappointment and keep a good deal of people in the game.

    So please go on and tell funny stories about your first experiences with Diablo 2 or talk about how the game could be more player-friendly. If you disagree please don't base your arguments purely on what you're familiar with but rather what's best for the game.
     
  2. ThulRasha

    ThulRasha Diablo: IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    It should be as player friendly as possible, that is hower not the same as making the game easy.
    The difficulty levels of Diablo2 were good. I don't see how making it easier would make Diablo3 a better game, I think it would make it worse.

    If a casual player can complete the game on the default difficulty level without to much problems, then I don't see what is wrong or what could be improved. No one is forcing a player with limited time to do it all again on a higher more time consuming difficulty level.
     
  3. kirborg

    kirborg IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    I've always been in favor for the easy to learn, hard to master approach. Make the gameplay accessible for new players, but also add depth so the hardcore players have something to seperate them from the casuals,
     
  4. mouseman

    mouseman IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    This wasn't my point. My point is that respeccing is a good thing because in general the game is too hard to complete in hell difficulty without serious thinking build-wise. It should be and it's good that way. What's not is that once a casual gamer hits nightmare he finds out he would have to start all over again. The difference between a casual gamer and a more serious gamer is simply the fact that a casual gamer stops playing the game at that point.

    Of course respeccing ables serious gamers to have things like early-builds you can respec to end-game builds but in the end of the day more people are able to enjoy the game and that's what is important to me.

    I also love the easy to learn, hard to master approach. The thing is that at the moment the gap between easy to learn and hard to master is huge. You can't casually slide to a more serious gamer just by playing the game. There's no room in between the two groups and generally the swift between the groups doesn't happen by playing the game - it happens by studying the breakpoints and builds on the internet. It takes a whole different approach to the game to really master it. In many cases, especially in HC, you have to use cheats to compete, or even survive.


     
  5. sicilian

    sicilian IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    But that's the thing... the casual gamer WAS able to beat the game. They didn't need a respec to beat it, they just beat it. Now they have the experience, the know-how of the skills, etc, to make better decisions if they want to try to make a character that can go higher.

    If you don't set consequences to wrong decisions when character building, you make those decisions meaningless, and thus the game gets dry IMO.


     
  6. ThulRasha

    ThulRasha Diablo: IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    I was a bit at a loss what your point was actually about. I asumed you meant the difficulty levels.
    Now that you say that your point was that respeccing is a good thing, I can indeed see that you could mean that with your paragraph about specific character builds and with your paragraph about how you started with the Paladin. But had you not clarified it, I would have had no idea on how to deduce it from your post.

    Anyhow, wasn't it already confirmed that some form of respeccing is indeed planned for Diablo3?
     
  7. Dorfoumous

    Dorfoumous IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2007
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    When I first turned on Diablo II LOD.

    I started out with a Barb, Dorf_The_Might or something like that, he got into his 80's with almost a ful IK set. Pre V1.09. Infact he was a cross-over char, from Classic to LOD

    I really stopped playing in V1.10 when my Barb would die constanly in Hell. I saw the game to be unbalenced.

    Even now, I still do. Unless you have a cookie-cutter char you really can't do much. In my opinion.

    If diablo 3 is like that, sure I'll play it for awhile, but then again it will sit on my shelf for a few years.

    i'm more infavor of a system that moves when you do...so if your level 90 everything else is 90.

    Like Oblivion type. So you could finish the game at Lvl 1.

    Also, I think a system like that, wouldn't have any "dead" skills or skills that no one uses, but only for the synergies.
     
  8. Tsumaru

    Tsumaru IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    I think an RPG is designed to require some forethought and analysis. As soon as you start making failsafes and fallback options in an RPG which mean that you can basically restart your character at any point, it loses the whole point of the game. You might as well just go play a FPS with a good storyline (granted, those are hard to come across these days!).

    To give an example, Oblivion. I just assumed lockpicking would be a good idea. Then along comes the Skeleton Key, making my huge lockpicking skill completely redundant. This is frustrating and irritating - but it's also life. And you deal with it. I could have open a cheat and taken all my skill points out of lockpick and put them in somewhere else. That would have been nice. I also could have put on godmode while I was at it - that sure as hell makes the game easier and kills any frustration.

    But at the same time; not having to worry about skill or stat distribution or having any forethought at all just - in my opinion - ruins the fun of the game, and the whole point of an RPG in the first place! Obviously you can't know exactly what you're gonna come up against in the game so you can't fully know what to do - but that's part of the thrill. Sure it's frustrating when you've got an exclusively physical damage character and you get to those goddamned physical resistances and physical immunes in Hell and whatnot. But you find a solution. Maybe you socket your weapon for elemental damage. Maybe you invest some points in an elemental skill for them. Being able to just say "oh, I know, I'll completely remap my character" ruins the tension and the challenge.

    Now, personally I usually follow the policy - "if you don't like it, just don't do it" when it comes to an optional feature which you don't have to use. But I think with something like respeccing, I think people will be tempted to use it because it's there. I mean there have been plenty of hero editors out there for D2, and at any point you could easily go in and re-do your character. And almost every game on the market comes with a god mode and cheats these days. But because they're unofficial, most people won't do them, and they will persevere. And at the end, you feel more satisfied for beating the challenge. Having this in-game easy fix option will just tempt the non-hardcore gamer to use it. And in my opinion, in this case, it's more important to stick true to the heart and soul of what an RPG is rather than to just make the game easier for the casual player.
     
  9. mouseman

    mouseman IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    Yeah I probably lost my strain of thought again.. I'm sorry :)

    Anyway, I'm not in favor of endless respecs without consequences. It could be a one-time thing. You could permanently loose stat points doing it. It could be like a witch doctor ritual - some voodoo magic to transform you in order to reassing your skills. While you get to distribute your skill points again, you might lose one or two - or gain a permanent -20 to health, or something.

    There are plenty of ways to make the respeccing option hurt a lot. That way a more serious gamer don't want to compromise their build and will rather just start again. A casual gamer gets to try again - but will be a lot more cautious in the future.

    When you think at it - starting a new character IS respeccing. It's just the most harsh way to do it. We need to find something in between. How about if you could only do one character class, ever? I'm sorry, you already did a barbarian. It sucked? Well, such is life, deal with it. It's fun because it's not life, you are able to start again, even if you can't in life. At the moment it's just really harsh and I'm glad it will be in the game in some form or the other - I'm hoping it will leave permanent damage to your character, though. And I hope respeccing stays out of hardcore mode.

    On to another subject. What is your first reaction when you start a new game? "I will try a melee class, because I think it's straight-forward and easy." A really bad choice in Diablo 2 right now, because they are really gear-dependant and at the same time unable to find gear if played as first characters.


     
  10. Dorfoumous

    Dorfoumous IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2007
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    I'd rather be able to respec then start 20 chars of the same class to find out I did something wrong again and end up dieing in Nightmare...that gets old real fast.
     
  11. sicilian

    sicilian IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    It's the old debate which has been rehashed a thousand times on these types of forums.

    I've accepted that there will be respeccing in the game, I'm just hoping they make it limited, and make the cost (whether that be in gold or time) so high that it isn't something you can do on a whim. You must have really messed up your build.


     
  12. sbn

    sbn IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    803
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    I would just like to comment that I believe strongly that changes do need to be made to make the game more player-friendly in terms of making this game more cooperative, fun, and enjoyable environment. Diablo 2 is none of those. This is one of the most anti-socially retarded games I have ever come across. The bigger the @$$ you are it seems, the better you are.

    Unlike many other online games (at least ones I do play) there are controls and methods to monitor behavior. One of the biggest aspects I would like to see changed that I commented in the other thread regarding this, is a language filter. I also believe very strongly in the idea that the creator of a game should have some control over whether someone is muted or not, or even kicked. The only real response I have heard on this idea is that people will say this will get abused. Well, not having it we already have abuse. When some punk comes in to MY game and starts spamming for a free rush, and when I say no, he calls me certain rather offensive words, I should have the right to remove him.

    When I player comes in to PK lower levels, why should WE have to leave the game. Why should we even have to leave and make a password protected game? This is after all an online social/cooperative game. I, and many others like me, should not have to suffer and be inconvenienced through the actions of immature children.

    I also believe that the way items will drop will enhance more cooperation as there will now be less selfishness regarding drops. It is quite apparent why they did this. In fact some of the changes they seem to be making really are in reaction to the way in which people act in D2.
     
  13. Jesse24

    Jesse24 IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    57
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    Diablo 2 was very straight forward and player friendly. If you're a casual gamer and you end up building a character that can't solo hell, that doesn't make it unfriendly. Hell is suppossed to be impossible, it's hell. Just because other people have built a character that can do it, doesn't mean the game is unfair to you. You can't expect to put skill points in random places and have Blizzard make your character as strong as someone who carefully planned their character and uses what's effective. It doesn't work like that, there will always be strong character builds and weak character builds.

    The best way to alleviate this problem is to offer the one respec per character so that once a person realizes what's efficient and what's useless, they can make the changes necessary.
     
  14. mouseman

    mouseman IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    sbn, 100% agreed.

    I hope you could filter games by "party", "rush" or something. Maybe you couldn't join a party game if you have skipped too many quests?

    Jesse24, I agree. I think I was unclear earlier, but that was the same point I was trying to make. However, I still think respeccing should worsen everytime you use it. Maybe the first time would only give you small permanent damage to you character, but it would get heavier all the time. I really like the witchdoctor voodoo magic to respec idea, it'd fit to the game nicely I think.
     
  15. havedeath

    havedeath IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    Don't make it easier. Don't make respecs. But... make every skill useful and make classes more balanced so you're not as screwed if you aren't such and such class with uber gear.
     
  16. stillman

    stillman IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    3,658
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    Sbn, I agree with your idea. In fact, I'd like to see it with a bit of a twist...

    Some one who talks trash all day gets "tagged". Once tagged, a program Blizzard made patiently waits until that player hits a high level with ANY of his chrs. Then one day, that chr is merrily walking along and then suddenly a lev 500 thunderstorm hits them and automatically kills them just before they level so they lose a ton of exp, or die in hc mode. That sort of thing.

    In the mean time, if someone joins your game and begs for a rush, you can rest assured that they do so because they suck. Hard. Just knowing they're sucky beggers is good enough for me.

    Anyway, I'll come back to this thread later to relate some of my first experiences in d2.
     
  17. mouseman

    mouseman IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    Hehe thunderstorm :) I don't know about just kicking people out of the games but at the least we should have voting options to kick players out of the party or the game and so on. That way no one alone could dictate the game but we wouldn't have to put up with pk'ers, people begging rushes and so on.
     
  18. sicilian

    sicilian IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    I agree, kicking people out would get abused. People would run someone up to a boss, and right before it's about to die, kick them so they don't get any loot. Less of a problem since the loots are separate now, but it would be used to grief, no doubt.

    I think you should be able to block an account from being able to join your games. Have an option when another player is in your game that just says "Block <character name>'s account". It wouldn't autokick them from the current game, but once you left and made another, you wouldn't have to worry about that person again.

    Maybe even have a mechanism in Battle.net that says, if you receive X number of blocks in a certain amount of time, you will be unable to join any game for a while. You'd have to make your own or play alone.


     
  19. Feramors

    Feramors IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    Eh, I didn't have any problms starting D2. Although I DO tend to read the manual cover to cover before starting a game, just so I know that extra bit about it.
     
  20. oswiu

    oswiu IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Re: Should Diablo 3 be more player-friendly?

    I loved the fact that the game mechanics of D2 were complex and that a lot of research and thought went into making a successful character. I very fondly remember learning the attack speed tables for bowazons inside and out.

    And I didn't mind the fact that I'd have to start over and rebuild if I didn't understand things quite well enough, or if I'd miscalculated some aspect of my characters.

    I understand that not everyone feels this way, but this RPG nature was one of the things about D2 that really appealed to me.

    I've never played WoW myself, but when I saw my flatmates who did re-speccing their chars, I was kind of put off, and wondered to myself why one would even bother learning the nuances of the game, or planning their approach to a character carefully.

    While I suppose I could live with some re-speccing (especially if characters take even longer to develop than in D2) I'd really prefer it to be at least very difficult/painful.
     

Share This Page