To be fair, PvP and PvE are phonetically similar. I was listening to the Q&A while I was doing other things and at some point I didn't know what they were talking about anymore. Then again, I am awful with acronyms.
I was surprised that the entire crowd booed when the kid asked about competitive pvp. Even if you aren't trying to be pro-level, isn't pvp in general going to be competitive..?
I think the issue is "competitive PvP" versus "fun PvP". Yeah, in "fun PvP" you still compete against other people, but the main point is to just have fun.
I was surprised that the entire crowd booed when the kid asked about competitive pvp. Even if you aren't trying to be pro-level, isn't pvp in general going to be competitive..?
I think the issue is "competitive PvP" versus "fun PvP". Yeah, in "fun PvP" you still compete against other people, but the main point is to just have fun.
Sounds like some care bear bullshit to me.
I'm afraid if my eyes roll anymore, they are going to come out of my fucking sockets.
Well that is dissapointing, "That is not the kind of game we want to have" so what kind of game do they want to have? The guy made a good point, there really is no reason to get better in Diablo 2, why should I keep playing? The only reason I played Diablo 2 so much was because I was 12 and thought it was awesome, and I loved the PvP. Although at the time I didn't realize the game wasn't really made for PvP, but I still spent a lot of time doing it because that is what I enjoy. Sure I also beat the game and had 7 characters but PvP seemed like it was the goal of the game to me. Why make your character stronger? So you can be stronger than other characters and kill them.
And they support it being fun, which is awesome. I'm not a hardcore PVP'er. I was one of the WoW players that loathed the arenas and if anything, might do it just enough to earn some of the rewards that balanced out any place my gear was lacking for PVE content.
Thus, I'm totally down with them not having to make design and mechanic sacrifices in the name of going "e-sport", which they specifically noted that the SC2 team had to do. Balancing continues to this day (far as I know) and will likely continue in the future.
And I'm sure Diablo 3 will have update patches and balancing of features both in PVE and PVP, but the difference will be that on the PVP end they have outright stated that they just don't give a shit about reaching for that 99.999...% level of balance between the classes. Too many variables, way too much time and energy to dedicate for rapidly diminishing returns on results. They know people want to PVP, so they're giving it to us as an aside for a primarily PVE game, which makes sense.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Fizban, I think you misunderstand what they are trying to say.
The pvp in Diablo 3 will be better than Diablo 2.
It will be a more fair, balanced, and fun game play experience. That is thier goal.
However, their goal is not to spend thousands of hours of development time tweaking every skill and build so that there is the expectation of perfect balance. If there is no expectation of balance, all (okay.. most) of the whiners go away and the people who just want to kill eachother and won't cry because its "unfair" dominate the pvp play experience.
To put it another way.. there will be less "OMG NERF WIZERDS" and more "Fuck I died in two seconds.. I need better gear/ a better build/ more skill. gg ."
I think it is the opposite, the arena will be dominated by the perfect team of the unbalanced builds because nothing can even come close to remotely stopping this dominating inbalance. I don't know what they mean as esports "competitive" but the way they talked in that video it sounds like they don't want to put too much effort into the balance.
Watch more of the Q&A, they said seperating the two bodies of play is what is going to allow them to make balance. But PvP and the balance thereof will always be a second priority to the main game.
And really, the presence of Arenas itself is more support for PvP than Diablo 2 had. And they can only get more balanced.
They address the question of endgame in that Q&A too.
In Diablo 2, the end game for some was just making new characters and playing through it again. For others, it was running the bosses over and over til your eyes bleed for more loot. And a lot of people were OK with that, because loot is awesome and killing things is awesome. But they also want to make more end game options for people who's fancy that doth not tickle
For some, it was the unsupported PvP. Which Diablo 3 will improve on, and will have a superior system. The PvP in Diablo 3 IS going to be better than Diablo 2's, and I enjoyed Diablo 2's, because I am an asshole and I enjoy killing people as they run to their corpse.
but REALLY they don't have a concrete end game yet because there is no game yet, haha. their words.
I don't think Diablo 2 had that much of an endgame, and it didn't really matter. Because playing that game over and over IS fun, and that game IS successful.
The only thing I'm disappointed in so far is that they were playing around with the playercap in multiplayer game and they think they've settled on 4 (like the original diablo's) but they'll keep experimenting with it.
Yeah, I just got tired of running *randomly generated desert hall* for the 10,000th time for *rare item*, it was like WoW except without any challenge at all.
I really should watch that video but the rest of the blizzcon really turned me off to blizzcon videos, go go awkward moments.
SC2 didn't sacrifice anything to keep the game balanced, they cut out dumbshit to keep the game fun, because an unbalanced game is not fun.
It's in the Q&A, but a D3 developer outright said that he loves SC2, plays it regularly, talks to the SC2 development team regularly, and that they had to make changes and sacrifices to balance things out to E-Sport levels.
That's not conjecture, that's something they actually said.
I guess I just don't understand what the point to making your character stronger is then, there really is no endgame.
You don't know that there will be no endgame.
Funny thing, they address this in the Q&A as well, but currently there is no endgame because they're currently working on the 'game' part, which needs to be done first. However, they do intend for there to be an endgame, and have ideas for what it might entail, but until they get closer to completion (they mentioned maybe around initial Beta testing) it's hard to nail down just what it might be in specific.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
yeah there are some awkward moments in those Q&A vids. I do the same thing in real life... if someone asks a stupid question or a question over again to a professor, I get really embarassed and I blush.
I blushed because of a video from BlizzCon I was so embarassed for the poor guy.
However! It is worth the information... I especially like the point where someone asks what I was wondering... how the characters in Diablo 1 got corrupted and had implied fates in Diablo 2, they have plans to do the same to the Diablo 2 characters in D3. Aside from the Barbarian, of course
SC2 didn't sacrifice anything to keep the game balanced, they cut out dumbshit to keep the game fun, because an unbalanced game is not fun.
It's in the Q&A, but a D3 developer outright said that he loves SC2, plays it regularly, talks to the SC2 development team regularly, and that they had to make changes and sacrifices to balance things out to E-Sport levels.
That's not conjecture, that's something they actually said.
Yes, I saw that but I don't think they are right about that. They didn't sacrifice anything for the game, they took out ideas that wouldn't work and balanced the game making it more fun.
well it's a single player game. not an MMO with an expanding world.
I never really thought of Diablo as a single player game, I think I have done one playthrough in single player in both games and that is it. The draw really is the multiplayer aspect.
Fizban140 on
0
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
SC2 didn't sacrifice anything to keep the game balanced, they cut out dumbshit to keep the game fun, because an unbalanced game is not fun.
It's in the Q&A, but a D3 developer outright said that he loves SC2, plays it regularly, talks to the SC2 development team regularly, and that they had to make changes and sacrifices to balance things out to E-Sport levels.
That's not conjecture, that's something they actually said.
Yes, I saw that but I don't think they are right about that. They didn't sacrifice anything for the game, they took out ideas that wouldn't work and balanced the game making it more fun.
So, the guy who works at Blizzard, has insider knowledge to the Starcraft 2 development cycle and propably talks to those guys on regular basis, he's just spewing misinformation for the sake of it?
However! It is worth the information... I especially like the point where someone asks what I was wondering... how the characters in Diablo 1 got corrupted and had implied fates in Diablo 2, they have plans to do the same to the Diablo 2 characters in D3. Aside from the Barbarian, of course
just in case anyone finds this as boner-inspiring as I do
SC2 didn't sacrifice anything to keep the game balanced, they cut out dumbshit to keep the game fun, because an unbalanced game is not fun.
It's in the Q&A, but a D3 developer outright said that he loves SC2, plays it regularly, talks to the SC2 development team regularly, and that they had to make changes and sacrifices to balance things out to E-Sport levels.
That's not conjecture, that's something they actually said.
Yes, I saw that but I don't think they are right about that. They didn't sacrifice anything for the game, they took out ideas that wouldn't work and balanced the game making it more fun.
So, the guy who works at Blizzard, has insider knowledge to the Starcraft 2 development cycle and propably talks to those guys on regular basis, he's just spewing misinformation for the sake of it?
I didn't say it was misinformation, just that SC2 GREATLY benifited from the extra balance on nearly all levels of the game. They cut out some stuff that wouldn't have been fun in the game to make it more balanced. The balancing part is what makes PvP (not protoss mirror match) so much more fun and rewarding, when you win you know you are the better player, not the advantaged player.
SC2 didn't sacrifice anything to keep the game balanced, they cut out dumbshit to keep the game fun, because an unbalanced game is not fun.
It's in the Q&A, but a D3 developer outright said that he loves SC2, plays it regularly, talks to the SC2 development team regularly, and that they had to make changes and sacrifices to balance things out to E-Sport levels.
That's not conjecture, that's something they actually said.
Yes, I saw that but I don't think they are right about that. They didn't sacrifice anything for the game, they took out ideas that wouldn't work and balanced the game making it more fun.
So, the guy who works at Blizzard, has insider knowledge to the Starcraft 2 development cycle and propably talks to those guys on regular basis, he's just spewing misinformation for the sake of it?
I didn't say it was misinformation, just that SC2 GREATLY benifited from the extra balance on nearly all levels of the game. They cut out some stuff that wouldn't have been fun in the game to make it more balanced. The balancing part is what makes PvP (not protoss mirror match) so much more fun and rewarding, when you win you know you are the better player, not the advantaged player.
You seem to assume that there were no sacrifices made because the game ended up balanced. Look at some of the stuff in the singleplayer campaign, like auto-refineries, the big transport ship, or auto-turret on bunkers. That, plus whatever stuff ended up on the cutting room floor, are the kind of sacrifices that got made to make the game balanced and it seems to me that the Diablo guy doesn't want to cut out all this fun and interesting stuff just to make the PvP game balanced.
SC2 didn't sacrifice anything to keep the game balanced, they cut out dumbshit to keep the game fun, because an unbalanced game is not fun.
It's in the Q&A, but a D3 developer outright said that he loves SC2, plays it regularly, talks to the SC2 development team regularly, and that they had to make changes and sacrifices to balance things out to E-Sport levels.
That's not conjecture, that's something they actually said.
Yes, I saw that but I don't think they are right about that. They didn't sacrifice anything for the game, they took out ideas that wouldn't work and balanced the game making it more fun.
So, the guy who works at Blizzard, has insider knowledge to the Starcraft 2 development cycle and propably talks to those guys on regular basis, he's just spewing misinformation for the sake of it?
I didn't say it was misinformation, just that SC2 GREATLY benifited from the extra balance on nearly all levels of the game. They cut out some stuff that wouldn't have been fun in the game to make it more balanced. The balancing part is what makes PvP (not protoss mirror match) so much more fun and rewarding, when you win you know you are the better player, not the advantaged player.
You seem to assume that there were no sacrifices made because the game ended up balanced. Look at some of the stuff in the singleplayer campaign, like auto-refineries, the big transport ship, or auto-turret on bunkers. That, plus whatever stuff ended up on the cutting room floor, are the kind of sacrifices that got made to make the game balanced and it seems to me that the Diablo guy doesn't want to cut out all this fun and interesting stuff just to make the PvP game balanced.
But it wasn't a sacrifice to the game, it was needed to make the game fun. They had to cut out those things to make the game fun, because they weren't fun in multiplayer.
Fizban140 on
0
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
But it wasn't a sacrifice to the game, it was needed to make the game fun. They had to cut out those things to make the game fun, because they weren't fun in multiplayer.
Seems to me the Diablo guy disagrees and that's not the kind of game he wants to make.
Posts
Crovax.436 Steam: Crovaxan
Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
Steam Friend code: 45386507
edit: holy check
Sounds like some care bear bullshit to me.
I'm afraid if my eyes roll anymore, they are going to come out of my fucking sockets.
Xbox Live: Kunohara
WoW was the first MMO after all.
How could I forget, WoW invented everything.
fizban is the guy at 5:15
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP956VP4VYE#t=5m15s
Thus, I'm totally down with them not having to make design and mechanic sacrifices in the name of going "e-sport", which they specifically noted that the SC2 team had to do. Balancing continues to this day (far as I know) and will likely continue in the future.
And I'm sure Diablo 3 will have update patches and balancing of features both in PVE and PVP, but the difference will be that on the PVP end they have outright stated that they just don't give a shit about reaching for that 99.999...% level of balance between the classes. Too many variables, way too much time and energy to dedicate for rapidly diminishing returns on results. They know people want to PVP, so they're giving it to us as an aside for a primarily PVE game, which makes sense.
The pvp in Diablo 3 will be better than Diablo 2.
It will be a more fair, balanced, and fun game play experience. That is thier goal.
However, their goal is not to spend thousands of hours of development time tweaking every skill and build so that there is the expectation of perfect balance. If there is no expectation of balance, all (okay.. most) of the whiners go away and the people who just want to kill eachother and won't cry because its "unfair" dominate the pvp play experience.
To put it another way.. there will be less "OMG NERF WIZERDS" and more "Fuck I died in two seconds.. I need better gear/ a better build/ more skill. gg ."
I hope that isn't true.
And really, the presence of Arenas itself is more support for PvP than Diablo 2 had. And they can only get more balanced.
In Diablo 2, the end game for some was just making new characters and playing through it again. For others, it was running the bosses over and over til your eyes bleed for more loot. And a lot of people were OK with that, because loot is awesome and killing things is awesome. But they also want to make more end game options for people who's fancy that doth not tickle
For some, it was the unsupported PvP. Which Diablo 3 will improve on, and will have a superior system. The PvP in Diablo 3 IS going to be better than Diablo 2's, and I enjoyed Diablo 2's, because I am an asshole and I enjoy killing people as they run to their corpse.
but REALLY they don't have a concrete end game yet because there is no game yet, haha. their words.
I don't think Diablo 2 had that much of an endgame, and it didn't really matter. Because playing that game over and over IS fun, and that game IS successful.
Crovax.436 Steam: Crovaxan
You don't know that there will be no endgame.
Luckily I only have 3 friends irl yall
I really should watch that video but the rest of the blizzcon really turned me off to blizzcon videos, go go awkward moments.
The point of making your character stronger is that it is fun you goose. :P
It's in the Q&A, but a D3 developer outright said that he loves SC2, plays it regularly, talks to the SC2 development team regularly, and that they had to make changes and sacrifices to balance things out to E-Sport levels.
That's not conjecture, that's something they actually said.
Funny thing, they address this in the Q&A as well, but currently there is no endgame because they're currently working on the 'game' part, which needs to be done first. However, they do intend for there to be an endgame, and have ideas for what it might entail, but until they get closer to completion (they mentioned maybe around initial Beta testing) it's hard to nail down just what it might be in specific.
I blushed because of a video from BlizzCon I was so embarassed for the poor guy.
However! It is worth the information... I especially like the point where someone asks what I was wondering... how the characters in Diablo 1 got corrupted and had implied fates in Diablo 2, they have plans to do the same to the Diablo 2 characters in D3. Aside from the Barbarian, of course
Yes, I saw that but I don't think they are right about that. They didn't sacrifice anything for the game, they took out ideas that wouldn't work and balanced the game making it more fun.
I never really thought of Diablo as a single player game, I think I have done one playthrough in single player in both games and that is it. The draw really is the multiplayer aspect.
So, the guy who works at Blizzard, has insider knowledge to the Starcraft 2 development cycle and propably talks to those guys on regular basis, he's just spewing misinformation for the sake of it?
just in case anyone finds this as boner-inspiring as I do
what happened to you, poor necromancer?
I didn't say it was misinformation, just that SC2 GREATLY benifited from the extra balance on nearly all levels of the game. They cut out some stuff that wouldn't have been fun in the game to make it more balanced. The balancing part is what makes PvP (not protoss mirror match) so much more fun and rewarding, when you win you know you are the better player, not the advantaged player.
the original Diablo's multiplayer had many bits cut out from single player
They just added that shit so that something would be different between the two. The core experience is a shared one.
The one you like most doesn't mean that's what the game is.
You seem to assume that there were no sacrifices made because the game ended up balanced. Look at some of the stuff in the singleplayer campaign, like auto-refineries, the big transport ship, or auto-turret on bunkers. That, plus whatever stuff ended up on the cutting room floor, are the kind of sacrifices that got made to make the game balanced and it seems to me that the Diablo guy doesn't want to cut out all this fun and interesting stuff just to make the PvP game balanced.
Seems to me the Diablo guy disagrees and that's not the kind of game he wants to make.