Dexterryu

On 7/29/2023 at 10:06 AM, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

I don’t feel bad for them. They’re not developing the game in a vacuum. They have their own sorted past when it comes to hated balance patches before this, and there are enough live service games with RPG build crafting mechanics they could have looked to to see how a community would respond. Fuck, Bungie JUST went through a similar update along with the expansion Light Fall. It went over like a lead balloon. And it also has seasonal mods that buff certain builds. But what helped Destiny a bit was there were also buffs and permanent mods added that made some builds easier. It wasn’t just a blanket nerf to the best builds and the players themselves. So like how nobody felt bad for 343 for fucking up a Battlepass and progression or stripping core customization opens from the game to force you to pay extra, I don’t feel bad for Blizzard. 
 

And it’s not like ANY of the patch was to make a better playing experience. The game didn’t get harder BUT more rewarding. Meta builds didn’t get nerfed BUT other builds were buffed to be viable options. The game didn’t become a slower grind BUT there was more added to the game to do so you won’t get bored. This was all done to slow down progression in hopes people wouldn’t max out and leave the game as fast. 
 

They had a lot of good will from the betas and initial release of the game and in less than 8 weeks of release pissed it away to try to stretch out player engagement numbers. 

On 7/28/2023 at 8:54 PM, Remarkableriots said:

Path of Exile 2 Devs 'Feel Sorry' for Blizzard Amid Diablo 4 Season 1 Struggles - IGN

WWW.IGN.COM

---

Path of Exile 2's developers said they "feel sorry" for Blizzard amid Diablo 4's Season 1 struggles, and also talked about what next year's closed beta absolutely has to get right.

 

The problems from my perspective is that the Devs hands are being forced by business people shouting at them about whatever KPIs they think are important over trying to just add content to the game to keep it fresh and fun. Business folks tend not to understand that there isn't really a KPI for fun.

17 hours ago, TheLeon said:

My experience with basically every game in this genre:

1. Get overwhelmed with the character creator, marvel at all the different possibilities, spend way too much time creating my character(s)
2. Trudge through the opening lore dump/tutorial, get overwhelmed by all the fiddly bits of the UI, controls, and game mechanics 
3. Once I’m a couple hours into the game, decide I hate my character, but there’s no way I’m going to go through all that again
4. Think “I’m still interested in this style of game, but this one juuust isn’t for me”

Good thing they allow for a full respec/reclass... especially for your #3. 

Getting really good reviews, mostly saying it improves upon and refines the first game. Only thing that isn't standout good is that the story narrative is just OK. Gonna be a busy August with BG3 and this.

14 minutes ago, legend said:

 

To be clear, I didn't mean what I said to be a criticism of the game. Just a warning to keep expectations in check.

All good. People keep expecting a lot, especially with the recent hype that the game has gotten so you are on point with that. If anything it's irresponsible reporting/marketing if they are saying that. In my book, if they are anywhere near what Witcher 3 had for ending variety (main game, especially) with where  the story ended up we're in for a treat. 

Heck, I just played the very first section of the EA game and was already interested in the side characters. I had to make myself stop playing since the save file won't be compatible and I didn't want to waste hours, spoil, or burn out on the game. Really looking forward to Aug 3 after burning myself on D4.

7 hours ago, legend said:

 

As much as I love Larian, this won't be that meaningful.

 

If there are only 14 independent outcomes featured in the ending that each can only go one of two ways, then you're up to 16384 possible endings and you'd only have to play the game twice to see the resolution to each of those 14 outcomes (once with them all in one state and once with them all in the other).

 

BG3 probably has some interaction between choice and it may be more than 2 ways for each to go, but the point is cross products make big numbers from small numbers.

There's only so much you can write narratively & code for... what we're getting is already fairly generous. I'd also say this is about at much as we can reasonably expect until games are able to be programed on the fly by a generative AI that mimics voice actors.

"Extra" I think. The middle one since I have zero interest in "classic" games.

Was a good value initially to play a bunch of games that I didn't want to buy, but now it's gotten really stale and has a ton of junk games. Might just opt to go to the low tier next year depending on the price. I probably would have done that last year had I not purchased during a black Friday sale.

That said... even with the stale library it's hard to say it's a bad value when you look at the delta between the two when on sale. I think there was less than a $25 difference for the year between the essential and extra versions with the sale. $25 wasn't too bad a gamble considering, and I have played through a couple of games on it.

I've messed around with it from time to time. It's not bad if you like sandbox style RPGs where you have a mix of building/fighting stuff. There's a lot to the crafting, which if you like that sort of thing you'll probably really enjoy it. But also an incredible amount of progression that makes it feel slow.

54 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

If grounded is synonymous with "dead and boring play area" then count me as ungrounded as possible. Now perhaps if they had complex mechanics involving surviving, maintaining your ship, dealing with orbital mechanics, that kind of stuff, then I could see it. That could be really cool. But it's Bethesda, so it's already going to be me stacking 300 identical pastrami sandwiches in my ship and fighting other ships that are, just like Fallout 76, reskinned Paarthurnaxes in space.

I think you're getting what I'm saying. To me wandering around a bunch of planets with a bunch of random fauna with BSG AI that either ignores you or charges you is just as boring because it's the same 1 or 2 enemies with different skins. Now, figuring out how to survive or get a key resource from a dead but dangerous planet is really interesting. How could you solve problems in places with more or less gravity and/or atmospheric pressure? If life does exist how did it evolve in those conditions? Most games always assume everywhere is basically 1 Earth Gravity.

8 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

I will fight every single person on this forum behind a Walmart before I cede one inch on "Bethesda combat is absolutely terrible" -- serviceable is several tiers above!

 

 

Who the hell wants it to be about right?? It's a video game! Get wacky with this shit!

This depends. Do we want a Ratchet and Clank/High on Life game or do we want something a bit more grounded? Astronomy/Astrophysics is a bit of a hobby for me so I may be different. I see lots of eye roll inducing stuff from Hollywood/Games when I see things that just wouldn't work from a physics perspective and break my suspension of disbelief.

From an Astonomy perspective... 1000 planets with complex multicellular life is likely getting more on the fiction side of science fiction. At especially if the game is set in our galaxy. 1000 planets with maybe a dozen or so that are beyond just being rocky seems about right (assuming we won't be exploring gas planets). 

On 6/19/2023 at 10:21 PM, Bjomesphat said:

I've played about 20 hours of Fallout 3 and 20 hours of Skyrim, and that's it for Bethesda RPGs. I like the idea of them, but just get bored with the execution. And honestly, those games would be better off without any combat. I think I'd rather just explore and do menial tasks rather than deal with a half-assed combat system. Starfield looks different though, so I'm cautiously optimistic.

This is basically me, or close to it. I've finished the campaigns for Oblivion/Skyrim & Fallout 3/4 which took about that time... but by the end the combat and talking to all too robotic NPCs had me just wanting to get the games over with. When I saw Starfield last year, I thought much of the same. Now the hype is growing (which it always seems to with Bethesda games) and I am trying to decide if I want to buy into it or not.

6 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

This is probably my primary complaint with the game. With it being online only you really have to commit to a quest. 
 

On the other hand you basically do the same thing no matter what you’re doing anyway so if you have to quit early and redo it no big deal lol

Might not be as big a deal unless you're playing with people. There are frequent checkpoint/save points so if you DC or just need to exit out for whatever reason you aren't set back too long.

1 minute ago, Chris- said:

 

If set bonuses are anything like D3, they will be a necessity for 9/10 endgame builds. Non-set aspects are important, but until we find out what the set bonuses are, no one will know how to best leverage them. 

They are there, they're just implemented as Uniques vs being a set.

22 minutes ago, Chris- said:

 

I know there is already endgame content, but given that there are no sets - and set bonuses are critical to endgame builds - I don't see much of a point in worrying about builds yet.

Most of the legendary's will have aspects that will greatly impact a build. So while these aren't a "set" identified by green font, they are already there for the most part. This also gives players flexibility in their build instead of chasing whatever the current meta is.

19 hours ago, Chris- said:

Currently 27 (Tier 1) and just having a blast bopping around, exploring stuff. The game doesn't even have endgame sets yet so there's no point worrying about build or min-maxing.

There is very much an endgame. Tier 3 & 4, plus a slew of activities and nightmare dungeons open up once you complete each tiers capstone dungeon.

3 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Thanks! One question about Barb this time around—since you pull out a few different kinds of weapons for different skills, does that mean you need to keep all those weapons levelled up? Or does your attack damage pull from the strongest weapon? Main concern is that I'll need to focus too much on hunting down/keeping up with a bunch of different weapons compared to other classes.

One of the Pros/Cons of the Barb is that they have an extra gear slot that other classes do not have. The pro is that once you are geared up, you are stronger. The con mostly is this will make you feel a little weaker early game. Gear drops fairly regularly so keeping it up is not terribly difficult... generally. Min/Maxing might be a little harder at end game.

3 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

So what's everyone's most-fun class so far? I usually run Barb, but thinking of starting Necro or Sorcerer this time.

They're all fun. They're already getting buffed/nerfed so don't make a choice based on current balance as it is changing. They all have some things that are challenging about them and things they do really well. So play what you think sounds/looks the coolest to you.

Just hit 49 on my Necro last night before logging of. Currently in WT2, Act 3. I've been doing a bunch of side quests and the dungeons that have aspects for my class so I'm probably much higher level than I should be at this point in the main story. Really enjoying myself so far but I do have some gripes that I'm going to share with the devs via Reddit and the official forums.

Gameplay stuff:
1. Corpse explosion w/shadow damage modifier - need to make this more transparent. Can't see what's going on at all whether it's my character that does it or someone else. I like this version but can't stand using it due to the visibility issue.

2. Some side quests seemed designed to unnecessarily waste time. Example... Start quest at an Inn. Run to the very bottom of the map -> back to the inn (thankfully I can portal there) -> quest giver says one sentence to meet them at another far away spot -> We kill some stuff -> "Meet me back at the inn"-> One more sentence -> "Let's meet at this other place" (that was right next to where we just were)-> Run there, fight, finish. Lots of pointless running.

QOL stuff:
1. NPC Vendor placement - Why are they so spread out in the town. Can these be consolidated? Pointless running around.
2. Gems - Like the mechanic (a staple since D2), but can we get an Inventory tab for these? Time waster to keep dropping them off in the stash and taking up unnecessary inventory space. Takes away from the combat which is the fun part of the game.

 

2 hours ago, legend said:

 

I don't think the value of keeping messages concise is limited to people with short attention spans.

 

Let's set aside whether "short attention span" is good, bad, or neutral. You're still blaming an outcome on some supposed cognitive property of an entire generation which is a dubious claim to make that is regularly a mistake of the older generation (or the yelling at cloud subset specifically!) and it's not going to be received well either.

100% agree... my point is that large companies that want to attract/keep talent call this out specifically and work hard to cater to it. It's not a cognitive property per se, but it is the way that many have adapted to modern day media and communication. 

At any rate... let's get back to talking about Diablo 4 and how to this point (on PC at least) it's been a near perfect launch.

13 minutes ago, legend said:

 

That's weird that you don't, but it doesn't really make it better? Just like telling someone you think they're ugly but that you don't personally consider that a deficiency won't really change the impact of what you said. Maybe to you having a short attention span isn't a negative quality, but to most people it is, and blaming an outcome on some supposed blanket quality of the younger generation remains a path to cloud yelling  

I guess my writing wasn't as clear as it could have been. My point was that any type of consumer product has to at some level consider their audience. Depending on the situation short attention span can be an advantage or disadvantage. As a leader where I work (AWS) it is somewhat of an advantage and we keep our internal messages very succinct and concise. No 1000 word emails - desired outcome first, additional details after. On the flip side, longer attention spans are better for various types of analytics or fine craftsman ship.

In the case of a game, the majority of players are likely Milenial/Gen-Z so it's probably tuned to their taste. 

14 hours ago, legend said:

 

I think we should avoid assuming it's the fault of the younger generation having some deficiency. That path leads to cloud yelling  

Where did I imply that it was a deficiency? It's just a difference.

16 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

For what it's worth, I think vanilla WoW actually did this pretty well, seeing your first blue item was several hours in, and prior to that even greens weren't super common.

 

I think part of it for me is that rarities stopped meaning rare and started referencing just quality. So you do any raid in WoW and you're all kitted out in purples, they're not epic anymore. Even legendary items stopped feeling special. No WoW player is ever even going to contemplate a white or green item unless they're leveling for a couple hours for a new expansion, and they'll be permanently out of dungeon blues in a week.

 

I'd really like if more games scaled all this shit way back, have dungeons drop whites and greens and have blues be cool finds and purples actually feel like very rare epic finds. But people need their mindless loot fountains to where everything that isn't the highest rarity (outside of super specific items that actually are rare) is basically immediately trash.

I'm going to guess that you're a fellow GEN-X... in which case I can say I agree with you. However, I wonder how much the short attention span of GenZ factors into the loot frequency. I'm of the opinion that the pixel color choice used by the item name is over emphasized. Most games, unless you're leveling you don't even look at anything that isn't at least Rare (yellow) quality because it can't be an upgrade (in which case, I'd rather it have just been a gold drop instead of taking up an inventory spot.

38 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

 

I think I've just been overexposed to a billion different loot systems, so when I see an explosion of loot from a boss in Diablo (during the beta) I was just like "goddamn this is so much busywork" I think I personally prefer much much less loot with rare items actually being very rare. I think PSO was the closest Diablo-style game I ever truly clicked with. Seeing those red (or later rainbow I think) boxes and not knowing what they were was quite exciting.

 

But this, on the other hand...

 

 

It's soo much. It's like fuck man, you took something kinda fun and made it a chore.

 

I'm kinda torn, I still want to try out Diablo 4, maybe see if this time it'll somehow hook me when it never did before. I think we all know how that'd turn out but I'm still so curious. If I just at least found the act of combat fun like so many others did maybe it'd be worth it.

I agree with you on too much loot. Division felt that way. When you're min/maxing for better roles it gets dull fast.  Diablo 3 launched with the opposite problem in that useful loot was too rare so people mainly geared up via the auction house (which got removed in the expansion).  So it's all about the right mix. The server slam felt just about right whereas the first beta weekends were intentionally overtuned for loot drops to allow people to get to Ashava.

2 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

I wonder if I'll ever understand the appeal of ARPGs. I've played a bit of each Diablo and PoE, including the beta for this, and it just never seems appealing to me in the slightest. They're obviously not for me, but I just can never see what the appeal actually is. They seem so monotonous and repetitive and do people still get a rush from getting loot drops? And then the concept of seasons where you just play another throwaway character, I just can never seem to figure out what part actually draws people in. Or why it being super dark and gritty is appealing as your dude does a ballerina twirl with a giant sword like a D-tier anime.

With Diablo, Blizzard basically cracked the code on human brain reward responses for a virtual experience. Along the way each of the games had really good polish (D3 launch being somewhat of an exception). It's one of the thing, even with the sounds that the loot drops make effectively almost have a pavlovian effect. Having played all the Diablo's extensively just the noise of a legendary drop in the background gets my attention and piques my curiosity. They've mastered digital crack.

That said, I agree with you on the seasonal characters. That does not appeal to me as much. D3 seasons at one point had the right mix for me in that they were a chase for seasonal gear sets. 

20 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

This.

 

There's still something to be said for future lineup hype.  But if there's any takeaway here, its that CG announcements hardly move the needle.  Microsoft did a ton of that at the start of this gen, but what people generally went for was what was material.  Now Sony's getting their own shit for falling back on it.

 

Smoke & mirrors is stupid.  These companies should resist the temptation to do it, and instead set expectations accordingly.

I think the difference between when CG moved the needle and now was at the time CG was still new and cool. Even with those, their was still progress being made which added a little to the cool factor. Now, CG is everywhere and no one cares.