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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
I have full faith that it won't be, like, "omg 3 wizards rape every other single combination just by rolling their faces on their keyboards! I'm not even looking at the screen and clicking wildly and I win!"
Nobody is saying that it won't be competitive. Just that they won't be dedicating absurd time, resources and manpower to ensuring that the nigh-infinite number of specs, class combinations, gear setups and whatnot will be balanced within an anal retentive degree. Nobody here (that I know of) wants "an uber combo" RMP style (or whatever the fuck, I haven't played WoW in a year and haven't regularly arena'd in two or three), just that if, oh, say Witchdoctors prove to have a greater than statistical anomaly chance of beating all takers, that a slight adjustment might be required but that it wouldn't be seen as the end of days with wailing and gnashing of teeth and dogs and cats living together and mass hysteria.
We seem to be splitting hairs here. They say "It'll be competitive and fun" and you seem to be taking their lack of E-Sport levels of dedication to say that it'll be competitive but will it be competitive? with a knowing wink.
I expect it'll be fun. I doubt I'll give a shit if 3 months of exhaustive testing shows that my favoured main class is 2% worse off in arenas.
... nerfrogueslol
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
but by "fun" you seem to mean "balanced for esports", so I'm not sure what you're envisioning there
ronya 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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
but by "fun" you seem to mean "balanced for esports", so I'm not sure what you're envisioning there
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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
but by "fun" you seem to mean "balanced for esports", so I'm not sure what you're envisioning there
they definitely cut a ton of fun stuff. Would that Black Hole ability the mothership used to have be fun? Hell yes it would. It would be unbalanced, and it wouldn't be fun to have used against you, but if you were making the game with no concern for balance, only trying to stuff in as much neat stuff as possible, it would still be there.
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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
but by "fun" you seem to mean "balanced for esports", so I'm not sure what you're envisioning there
A balanced game is a fun game, SC2 wouldn't be played if it wasn't balanced. There is a reason BW was played 10 years after release.
Anyways that final destination example is a good point, I hope the game doesn't rely on random luck (items) and more on skill (no items).
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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
but by "fun" you seem to mean "balanced for esports", so I'm not sure what you're envisioning there
A balanced game is a fun game, SC2 wouldn't be played if it wasn't balanced. There is a reason BW was played 10 years after release.
Anyways that final destination example is a good point, I hope the game doesn't rely on random luck (items) and more on skill (no items).
... I hate to break it to you, but I'm starting to suspect that Diablo II, and III, might not exactly be your kind of game.
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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
but by "fun" you seem to mean "balanced for esports", so I'm not sure what you're envisioning there
A balanced game is a fun game, SC2 wouldn't be played if it wasn't balanced. There is a reason BW was played 10 years after release.
Anyways that final destination example is a good point, I hope the game doesn't rely on random luck (items) and more on skill (no items).
... I hate to break it to you, but I'm starting to suspect that Diablo II, and III, might not exactly be your kind of game.
Why? I have played a lot of Diablo, and Diablo 2. I know what kind of game it is I just hope that the Arena feature is fun and balanced.
and by "fun" you mean "balanced", and by "balanced" you mean "where randomness, and items, play no part", and that just does not seem fun, at least to me.
ronya on
0
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
Two zerglings, no upgrades, one health. Whoever gets the first hit in wins.
and by "fun" you mean "balanced", and by "balanced" you mean "where randomness, and items, play no part", and that just does not seem fun, at least to me.
There has to be random elements or outcomes for you to have fun? That is strange.
I think items should play a part but not be the defining factor.
Two zerglings, no upgrades. Whoever gets the first hit in wins.
The ultimate game of balance and skill.
Or just the original BW, but whatever you think is more fun.
Fizban140 on
0
kaleeditySometimes science is more art than scienceRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
every single unique item effect, every single combination of gear, and every single glyph or rune or whatever they're called on every single skill has a chance of breaking multitudes of pvp character setups
diablo games, by design, are not going to be balanced outside of specific combinations of character classes, skills, and gear.
kaleedity on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered 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.
I just hope he means that they can make a balanced game but not cater to the WoW style esports gameplay. Make it fun and balanced while still being competitive.
but by "fun" you seem to mean "balanced for esports", so I'm not sure what you're envisioning there
A balanced game is a fun game, SC2 wouldn't be played if it wasn't balanced. There is a reason BW was played 10 years after release.
Anyways that final destination example is a good point, I hope the game doesn't rely on random luck (items) and more on skill (no items).
... I hate to break it to you, but I'm starting to suspect that Diablo II, and III, might not exactly be your kind of game.
But Ronya, nobody in their right mind would PvP in Diablo 2 unless they had the precise items recommended to them in character build guides! There's nothing random about that at all!
every single unique item effect, every single combination of gear, and every single glyph or rune or whatever they're called on every single skill has a chance of breaking multitudes of pvp character setups
diablo games, by design, are not going to be balanced outside of specific combinations of character classes, skills, and gear.
So you are saying they shouldn't even try and balance the game at all and the arena is just for "giggles".
Not sure if I am following.
Fizban140 on
0
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited October 2010
The reason SC/BW/SC2 wouldn't be fun if they weren't balanced is that they are fundamentally PvP multiplayer games. Custom maps aside, the way to win is to kill the other player.
The Diablo games are not "two equally matched players fight each other," they're "One insanely powerful player slaughters like a billion monsters". The skills and gear are aimed toward that goal. There's less pressure on making the fight balanced because nobody plays as a Quill Rat or Mephisto. Sure, it's fun to take your "Kill a billion monster" skills and see what they do to other players, but it's not the main part of the game; it's not what the skills or gear were created for.
every single unique item effect, every single combination of gear, and every single glyph or rune or whatever they're called on every single skill has a chance of breaking multitudes of pvp character setups
diablo games, by design, are not going to be balanced outside of specific combinations of character classes, skills, and gear.
So you are saying they shouldn't even try and balance the game at all and the arena is just for "giggles".
D3 arena at blizzcon was very well balanced (outside of a few glaring bugs). But that's because the characters builds were hand picked by Blizzard.
But D3 isn't a game that the developers balance. It's a game the players balance. With the raw number of builds (they said something like 98 billion different skill + rune builds alone per character in D3) the vast, vast majority of them will not be viable.
Players will discover viable builds and team comps, and if you want to be successful in PvP you will run said builds. They may tweak the couple PvP centric moves that characters have here and there but that's pretty much all I would expect from them.
every single unique item effect, every single combination of gear, and every single glyph or rune or whatever they're called on every single skill has a chance of breaking multitudes of pvp character setups
diablo games, by design, are not going to be balanced outside of specific combinations of character classes, skills, and gear.
So you are saying they shouldn't even try and balance the game at all and the arena is just for "giggles".
Not sure if I am following.
it worked great for d2
The PvP scene in Diablo never really developed beyond random FFAs.
The Q and A quote is open for interpretation, I have no idea what he means as an esport. I have played a lot of different games on a competitive level and the only ones that don't work at all for competition or the ones that are so bad they no one wants to play them. I mean there are some that aren't really suited for it but those usually aren't that popular or are modded to fit.
And if SC is fun because it's balanced that must mean SC was utter shit for the 10 years they were BALANCING it. SC II is still being balanced. There are 100's of games that aren't balanced that people find fun. Fun in subjective. They are saying Diablo 3 has PvP but is not a PvP game. You don't need to read into that statement to figure it out. They aren't dangling out hope for people who want PvP. They're crushing it and saying sorry, not the game you're looking for, but buy it anyway please.
The vast majority of people get this, that's why that guy got booed. They say No PvP, a few people go "So, how about PvP?". You'll take the PvE characters into the Arena and kill each other with stuns lowered. If that's not enough PvP those people aren't going to like the game. Unless Blizzard were lying through their teeth.
Xeddicus on
"For no one - no one in this world can you trust. Not men. Not women. Not beasts...this you can trust."
I loved Diablo 2, I put a lot of time in Diablo 2, I was in the beta for the game and I can still remember exactly what I did. I just think that the arena has a ton of potential for fun beyond the boring treadmill that Diablo 2 became at high levels, all you did was solo run shit over and over and over and over and it was incredibly easy, it was like herbalism in WoW, it just isn't fun.
And if SC is fun because it's balanced that must mean SC was utter shit for the 10 years they were BALANCING it. SC II is still being balanced. There are 100's of games that aren't balanced that people find fun. Fun in subjective. They are saying Diablo 3 has PvP but is not a PvP game. You don't need to read into that statement to figure it out. They aren't dangling out hope for people who want PvP. They're crushing it and saying sorry, not the game you're looking for, but buy it anyway please.
The vast majority of people get this, that's why that guy got booed. They say No PvP, a few people go "So, how about PvP?". You'll take the PvE characters into the Arena and kill each other with stuns lowered. If that's not enough PvP those people aren't going to like the game. Unless Blizzard were lying through their teeth.
No but SC was very, very well balanced for that entire time. It was a very competitive game because of that balance. That is what concerns me about Diablo 3 when they say they don't want it to be competitive.
Since some people seem confused let me state how I feel about Diablo 3. I love the franchise, I think it will be a lot of fun but I think they are missing a huge opportunity with PvP. I will play the game but I doubt I will put too much time into it, I just never found "runs" to be that fun, in pretty much any game where the goal is to have a chance of collecting an item.
I think its pretty clear that they will do rudimentary balance (aka, certain VERY overpowered skills will get toned down), but wont attempt to make it so balanced that people expect a level playing field.
You wont get a level playing field. Just like in D2.
Also keep in mind that while it will certainly be possible for teams to develop that have complimentary builds, the vast majority of matches will be with random people. You will be paired up with a random person through matchmaking.. so even if you have the most perfect build ever ever.. you might get paired with a complete noob and be destroyed nonetheless.
I look at it as "structured randomness". You never know what you are going to get, and you never know if you are going to win or lose.
I don't believe pvp in D3 will be about "winning all the time" and "being the best". It will be more about enjoying the combat itelf. Competition is best done on a level playing field. When you introduce randomness and unfairness into a competitive environment, it becomes about the experience of playing, not the rewards one receives for winning.
Reminds me of a saying from Dwarf Fortress. Losing is fun!
They understand the majority of the Diablo players do not care about "balance" or "competitive". They want fun and maybe some challenge. It may turn into a big loot grinding treadmill (or not, as was said, End Game is TBD), but that's FINE for most people. Not for everyone, obviously.
Xeddicus on
"For no one - no one in this world can you trust. Not men. Not women. Not beasts...this you can trust."
I loved Diablo 2, I put a lot of time in Diablo 2, I was in the beta for the game and I can still remember exactly what I did. I just think that the arena has a ton of potential for fun beyond the boring treadmill that Diablo 2 became at high levels, all you did was solo run shit over and over and over and over and it was incredibly easy, it was like herbalism in WoW, it just isn't fun.
And the PvP support in Diablo 3 is a straight improvement over the game you already loved. So what is the issue?
You also seem to be assuming that Diablo 3's endgame will be exactly the same as Diablo 2, where everything can be facerolled by a modest character.
The dev team themselves have said D3's endgame is not yet decided, but we can make some educated guesses. We know that the game is simply in general going to be more difficult than D2. We also have seen time and time again, almost every silly aspect or feature of Diablo 2 being refined into a more sensible and fully supported modern equivalent for Diablo 3.
It seems like a pretty fair assumption that Diablo 3 will have some special support for players who have beaten the game with hellmode characters to give them additional windmills to tilt at rather than having to kill Baal again for the millionth time. Jay Wilsom himself made a joke during the Q&A that basically said the Diablo team also thinks running the same bosses over and over does not constitute a great endgame.
So, there is your incentive to "get better".
Secondly, I just do not agree with this ridiculous all or nothing hyperbole that, just because immaculate PvP balance is not a central concern for the game, means that there will be no PvP balance adjustments at all.
I am glad that the team is treating PvP as a "sideshow" and not devoting huge resources to making it ultra competetive, because it would be a distraction from what the game is really about. Maybe not for you, but most people who play Diablo are not ultra PvPers.
The best thing they're doing for PvP is splitting the spells. That's the main hangup with mixing the systems. So yeah, they'll take a crack and squishing flavor of the month builds. And no one will really care, thankfully.
Xeddicus on
"For no one - no one in this world can you trust. Not men. Not women. Not beasts...this you can trust."
I'm going to make the assertion that real pvp balance in a game like this is only possible if they plan for a few specific builds to be the best in pvp, and balance around those. Like, three builds per character class, at the absolute most... and that's pushing it.
I will also make the assertion that they are putting too much effort into the ability to customize your character in crazy ways to then go and say that only a infinitesimal fraction of these options are worth the trouble in pvp. The only way to do this is to forget about balance (beyond keeping any one or two builds from dominating everything) and simply try to make pvping with non-optimized builds as fun as possible.
I loved Diablo 2, I put a lot of time in Diablo 2, I was in the beta for the game and I can still remember exactly what I did. I just think that the arena has a ton of potential for fun beyond the boring treadmill that Diablo 2 became at high levels, all you did was solo run shit over and over and over and over and it was incredibly easy, it was like herbalism in WoW, it just isn't fun.
And the PvP support in Diablo 3 is a straight improvement over the game you already loved. So what is the issue?
You also seem to be assuming that Diablo 3's endgame will be exactly the same as Diablo 2, where everything can be facerolled by a modest character.
The dev team themselves have said D3's endgame is not yet decided, but we can make some educated guesses. We know that the game is simply in general going to be more difficult than D2. We also have seen time and time again, almost every silly aspect or feature of Diablo 2 being refined into a more sensible and fully supported modern equivalent for Diablo 3.
It seems like a pretty fair assumption that Diablo 3 will have some special support for players who have beaten the game with hellmode characters to give them additional windmills to tilt at rather than having to kill Baal again for the millionth time. Jay Wilsom himself made a joke during the Q&A that basically said the Diablo team also thinks running the same bosses over and over does not constitute a great endgame.
So, there is your incentive to "get better".
Secondly, I just do not agree with this ridiculous all or nothing hyperbole that, just because immaculate PvP balance is not a central concern for the game, means that there will be no PvP balance adjustments at all.
I am glad that the team is treating PvP as a "sideshow" and not devoting huge resources to making it ultra competetive, because it would be a distraction from what the game is really about. Maybe not for you, but most people who play Diablo are not ultra PvPers.
I hope that the PvP is fun and balanced, all we can do now is play the waiting game. The only concern I have is from what they say about balancing PvE and PvP seperately it sound quite easy to make changes without detracting from PvE (excluding man hours) but they don't seem to be that focused on it. But who knows, all we can do is wait, or bitch about bitching until then, whichever.
To reiterate, I love the series, I am very excited for this game and will probably actually preorder this.
I mean I really do like Diablo, I love how it is an online RPG that is fast, doesn't require hundreds of hours to start to have fun with the game, and that it is fast.
Fizban140 on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited October 2010
It's a little hard to argue about abstract things.
D2 has dozens of viable PvP builds and that was just an afterthought. Now they want to emphasize PvP and somehow it isn't enough. I'm sure PvP won't be dominated by a handful of builds. Sure, giant toads may not be viable in PvP, but that doesn't mean people won't try. Tweaking your character is half the fun.
IIRC, competitive pvp in Diablo 2 was always league-based. You'd join a league with rules that make PvP more balanced. Rules like "x" item or "x" skill is banned.
Final Destination, no items leagues, basically.
Edit: To make my point clear, if you're disappointed in pvp balance in Diablo 3, you could always join a competitive league with rules that you like when it comes out.
Jephery on
}
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
0
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
it's borderline impossible to say, at this point, how pvp will work. but between blizzard's history and the dedication of the fanbase, not to mention the insane amount of variety possible via runes, I think there will be pvp that is balanced enough to be very entertaining.
consider that they said skills will work somewhat different in pvp from pve. so pve shouldn't get in the way of that balance. then consider than any given rune -could- have different effects in pve from pvp... there is no reason they can't balance pvp separate from pve considering all of this even if it's not their main priority.
so fiz I think you're overreacting to what they said.
although personally I couldn't care less if they made pvp impossible.
Posts
I have full faith that it won't be, like, "omg 3 wizards rape every other single combination just by rolling their faces on their keyboards! I'm not even looking at the screen and clicking wildly and I win!"
Nobody is saying that it won't be competitive. Just that they won't be dedicating absurd time, resources and manpower to ensuring that the nigh-infinite number of specs, class combinations, gear setups and whatnot will be balanced within an anal retentive degree. Nobody here (that I know of) wants "an uber combo" RMP style (or whatever the fuck, I haven't played WoW in a year and haven't regularly arena'd in two or three), just that if, oh, say Witchdoctors prove to have a greater than statistical anomaly chance of beating all takers, that a slight adjustment might be required but that it wouldn't be seen as the end of days with wailing and gnashing of teeth and dogs and cats living together and mass hysteria.
We seem to be splitting hairs here. They say "It'll be competitive and fun" and you seem to be taking their lack of E-Sport levels of dedication to say that it'll be competitive but will it be competitive? with a knowing wink.
I expect it'll be fun. I doubt I'll give a shit if 3 months of exhaustive testing shows that my favoured main class is 2% worse off in arenas.
... nerfrogueslol
but by "fun" you seem to mean "balanced for esports", so I'm not sure what you're envisioning there
Super Smash Bros., Final Destination, items off.
At least, that's the kind of vibe I get from.
e: damn you and your ninja editing, reV.
they definitely cut a ton of fun stuff. Would that Black Hole ability the mothership used to have be fun? Hell yes it would. It would be unbalanced, and it wouldn't be fun to have used against you, but if you were making the game with no concern for balance, only trying to stuff in as much neat stuff as possible, it would still be there.
A balanced game is a fun game, SC2 wouldn't be played if it wasn't balanced. There is a reason BW was played 10 years after release.
Anyways that final destination example is a good point, I hope the game doesn't rely on random luck (items) and more on skill (no items).
... I hate to break it to you, but I'm starting to suspect that Diablo II, and III, might not exactly be your kind of game.
The ultimate game of balance and skill.
I think items should play a part but not be the defining factor.
Or just the original BW, but whatever you think is more fun.
diablo games, by design, are not going to be balanced outside of specific combinations of character classes, skills, and gear.
But Ronya, nobody in their right mind would PvP in Diablo 2 unless they had the precise items recommended to them in character build guides! There's nothing random about that at all!
So you are saying they shouldn't even try and balance the game at all and the arena is just for "giggles".
Not sure if I am following.
The Diablo games are not "two equally matched players fight each other," they're "One insanely powerful player slaughters like a billion monsters". The skills and gear are aimed toward that goal. There's less pressure on making the fight balanced because nobody plays as a Quill Rat or Mephisto. Sure, it's fun to take your "Kill a billion monster" skills and see what they do to other players, but it's not the main part of the game; it's not what the skills or gear were created for.
it worked great for d2
But D3 isn't a game that the developers balance. It's a game the players balance. With the raw number of builds (they said something like 98 billion different skill + rune builds alone per character in D3) the vast, vast majority of them will not be viable.
Players will discover viable builds and team comps, and if you want to be successful in PvP you will run said builds. They may tweak the couple PvP centric moves that characters have here and there but that's pretty much all I would expect from them.
The PvP scene in Diablo never really developed beyond random FFAs.
The Q and A quote is open for interpretation, I have no idea what he means as an esport. I have played a lot of different games on a competitive level and the only ones that don't work at all for competition or the ones that are so bad they no one wants to play them. I mean there are some that aren't really suited for it but those usually aren't that popular or are modded to fit.
The vast majority of people get this, that's why that guy got booed. They say No PvP, a few people go "So, how about PvP?". You'll take the PvE characters into the Arena and kill each other with stuns lowered. If that's not enough PvP those people aren't going to like the game. Unless Blizzard were lying through their teeth.
Why?
I loved Diablo 2, I put a lot of time in Diablo 2, I was in the beta for the game and I can still remember exactly what I did. I just think that the arena has a ton of potential for fun beyond the boring treadmill that Diablo 2 became at high levels, all you did was solo run shit over and over and over and over and it was incredibly easy, it was like herbalism in WoW, it just isn't fun.
No but SC was very, very well balanced for that entire time. It was a very competitive game because of that balance. That is what concerns me about Diablo 3 when they say they don't want it to be competitive.
Since some people seem confused let me state how I feel about Diablo 3. I love the franchise, I think it will be a lot of fun but I think they are missing a huge opportunity with PvP. I will play the game but I doubt I will put too much time into it, I just never found "runs" to be that fun, in pretty much any game where the goal is to have a chance of collecting an item.
You wont get a level playing field. Just like in D2.
Also keep in mind that while it will certainly be possible for teams to develop that have complimentary builds, the vast majority of matches will be with random people. You will be paired up with a random person through matchmaking.. so even if you have the most perfect build ever ever.. you might get paired with a complete noob and be destroyed nonetheless.
I look at it as "structured randomness". You never know what you are going to get, and you never know if you are going to win or lose.
I don't believe pvp in D3 will be about "winning all the time" and "being the best". It will be more about enjoying the combat itelf. Competition is best done on a level playing field. When you introduce randomness and unfairness into a competitive environment, it becomes about the experience of playing, not the rewards one receives for winning.
Reminds me of a saying from Dwarf Fortress. Losing is fun!
Just anything besides cow level runs or anything liek that.
Perhaps, if you don't find a game fun, you shouldn't endeavor to play it forever and ever and ever?
And the PvP support in Diablo 3 is a straight improvement over the game you already loved. So what is the issue?
You also seem to be assuming that Diablo 3's endgame will be exactly the same as Diablo 2, where everything can be facerolled by a modest character.
The dev team themselves have said D3's endgame is not yet decided, but we can make some educated guesses. We know that the game is simply in general going to be more difficult than D2. We also have seen time and time again, almost every silly aspect or feature of Diablo 2 being refined into a more sensible and fully supported modern equivalent for Diablo 3.
It seems like a pretty fair assumption that Diablo 3 will have some special support for players who have beaten the game with hellmode characters to give them additional windmills to tilt at rather than having to kill Baal again for the millionth time. Jay Wilsom himself made a joke during the Q&A that basically said the Diablo team also thinks running the same bosses over and over does not constitute a great endgame.
So, there is your incentive to "get better".
Secondly, I just do not agree with this ridiculous all or nothing hyperbole that, just because immaculate PvP balance is not a central concern for the game, means that there will be no PvP balance adjustments at all.
I am glad that the team is treating PvP as a "sideshow" and not devoting huge resources to making it ultra competetive, because it would be a distraction from what the game is really about. Maybe not for you, but most people who play Diablo are not ultra PvPers.
I will also make the assertion that they are putting too much effort into the ability to customize your character in crazy ways to then go and say that only a infinitesimal fraction of these options are worth the trouble in pvp. The only way to do this is to forget about balance (beyond keeping any one or two builds from dominating everything) and simply try to make pvping with non-optimized builds as fun as possible.
I hope that the PvP is fun and balanced, all we can do now is play the waiting game. The only concern I have is from what they say about balancing PvE and PvP seperately it sound quite easy to make changes without detracting from PvE (excluding man hours) but they don't seem to be that focused on it. But who knows, all we can do is wait, or bitch about bitching until then, whichever.
To reiterate, I love the series, I am very excited for this game and will probably actually preorder this.
I mean I really do like Diablo, I love how it is an online RPG that is fast, doesn't require hundreds of hours to start to have fun with the game, and that it is fast.
Final Destination, no items leagues, basically.
Edit: To make my point clear, if you're disappointed in pvp balance in Diablo 3, you could always join a competitive league with rules that you like when it comes out.
"Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
consider that they said skills will work somewhat different in pvp from pve. so pve shouldn't get in the way of that balance. then consider than any given rune -could- have different effects in pve from pvp... there is no reason they can't balance pvp separate from pve considering all of this even if it's not their main priority.
so fiz I think you're overreacting to what they said.
although personally I couldn't care less if they made pvp impossible.