Diablo 3 Beta

v0rtic3s said:
There are 7 different Runestones for every skill, so that's essentially 175 different skills for every character, 6 skill slots, to be used in any combination you so chose, and you can choose Elective Mode in order to do just that, and take any skills for any combination you want. So, 175 different skills to choose from, multiplied by six skill slots, is 1,050 possible different builds with skills alone, and that's not counting how much variation will be added by using different gear.
Click to expand...
There are 5 rune stones per skill, not 7, so 125 skills (150 in theory... 25 skills without stones + 125 modified skills), not 175.

And... you don't multiply 175 (or 150 rather) by 6. That's not how combinations work :rolleyes:

edit. actually, only Wizard has 25 skills. Every other class has 21-23 skills.. so that's even fewer options.
 
Last edited:
It is still a fuck-ton of varying "builds"

Just because his math wasn't accurate doesn't mean he doesn't have a point. I agree with him 100%.

How are they "telling you how to play" when you have HUNDREDS of skill/rune combinations that will ALL be viable?

People bitch too much about games that aren't even released. Finish a playthrough before you pass judgement.
It's kind of nazi-ish to be honest.
 
northrop said:
There are 5 rune stones per skill, not 7, so 125 skills (150 in theory... 25 skills without stones + 125 modified skills), not 175.

And... you don't multiply 175 (or 150 rather) by 6. That's not how combinations work :rolleyes:

edit. actually, only Wizard has 25 skills. Every other class has 21-23 skills.. so that's even fewer options.
Click to expand...

It should be noted that many of the runes do nothing more than literally "Make X skill do more damage" or "Make X skill cost less".
 
Operaghost said:
It is still a fuck-ton of varying "builds"

Just because his math wasn't accurate doesn't mean he doesn't have a point. I agree with him 100%.

How are they "telling you how to play" when you have HUNDREDS of skill/rune combinations that will ALL be viable?

People bitch too much about games that aren't even released. Finish a playthrough before you pass judgement.
It's kind of nazi-ish to be honest.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the fact that I'm not the only one with a clear perspective, thank you.

People are wrong in stating that, outright, the Runstones just make every different one more powerful and that's somehow "limiting". Blizzard specifically stated that no skill will ever become obsolete, because the Runestones mainly change the effects of a skill, not necessarily the damage... so you're completely misinformed.
You can continue to up the power of that skill by finding higher tier Runestones so it evens out, and does not become obsolete.

That's the whole mechanic they worked to balance.

Blizz specifically stated that, the way Runestones are supposed to work, is to specifically prevent any skill from ever becoming obsolete.

That it's not that higher tier Runestones necessary make a skill more powerful, but that it just changes the skill, but that if you invested in higher level Runestones for an early skill, that it would still be viable to use throughout the game in totality.

Get informed. Higher tier Runestones are different than higher level Runestones, so that even early level skills will not become obsolete in the game.

Runestones work in terms of power PER LEVEL of Runestone, NOT that a skill would not be as powerful necessarily as a skill that requires a more rare or "higher level" Runestone to obtain.

Skills also level with you, therefore, while the higher tier Runestones will give you skills that might be a little more powerful, a skill variation that uses a "lower level" Runestone will still be useful and far more powerful as you level up.

Different Runestones don't always equate more damage. A lot of the times it's simply a different, more "flamboyant" effect. Higher tier Runestones don't add more damage necessarily, but might have a lasting poison effect, as opposed to say a larger blast radius of fire, but do roughly the same damage and it can basically "even out" or just simply do something different.

Example: the Witch Doctor w/ Fire Bats - the Gold Runestone's ONLY effect difference is that the damage your bats do, steals some health. Where as the Crimson Runestone summons larger bats, 40 yard radius, doin 208% fire damage. The Crimson Runestone is one tier lower, but actually does MORE damage than the Golden Runestone, which is one tier higher, which just gives the advantage of stealing life.

So you're completely off in stating that the higher the tier, the more power, which isn't always the case, thus doesn't "limit" anything in regards to "everyone is going to use the same thing because the highest tier is the strongest", which simply is completely false.

It depends on playstyle, preference and what the Runestones actually do.

Hell, the Obsidian Runestone for Fire Bats, the highest tier Runestone, plagues enemies in an area, with slowly increased damage that can increase to 162% as poison (going on first level of skills) which is LESS than the 208% fire damage done by the Crimson Runestone at the same level.

Blizzard stated they did this on purpose, the mechanics of what I'm explaining, so that skills would not become "obsolete", so that information and your understanding of how the system works is completely inaccurate. They did it so that, if someone wanted to continue using Plague of Toads forever, they could, because the skill would level up with you, and higher tier of the same Runestone would prevent the skill from becoming obsolete because, hell, some people might love throwing toads around.

So, again, the whole "Are you really going to use the base skill over the rune that just increases its range with no tradeoff?" is TOTALLY inaccurate in regards to how the system works.

Maybe you should have done more research, because you're completely misinformed.
 
Last edited:
v0rtic3s said:
I appreciate the fact that I'm not the only one with a clear perspective, thank you.

People are wrong in stating that, outright, the Runstones just make every different one more powerful and that's somehow "limiting". Blizzard specifically stated that no skill will ever become obsolete, because the Runestones mainly change the effects of a skill, not necessarily the damage... so you're completely misinformed.
You can continue to up the power of that skill by finding higher tier Runestones so it evens out, and does not become obsolete.

That's the whole mechanic they worked to balance.

Blizz specifically stated that, the way Runestones are supposed to work, is to specifically prevent any skill from ever becoming obsolete.

That it's not that higher tier Runestones necessary make a skill more powerful, but that it just changes the skill, but that if you invested in higher level Runestones for an early skill, that it would still be viable to use throughout the game in totality.

Get informed. Higher tier Runestones are different than higher level Runestones, so that even early level skills will not become obsolete in the game.

Runestones work in terms of power PER LEVEL of Runestone, NOT that a skill would not be as powerful necessarily as a skill that requires a more rare or "higher level" Runestone to obtain.

Skills also level with you, therefore, while the higher tier Runestones will give you skills that might be a little more powerful, a skill variation that uses a "lower level" Runestone will still be useful and far more powerful as you level up.

Different Runestones don't always equate more damage. A lot of the times it's simply a different, more "flamboyant" effect. Higher tier Runestones don't add more damage necessarily, but might have a lasting poison effect, as opposed to say a larger blast radius of fire, but do roughly the same damage and it can basically "even out" or just simply do something different.

Example: the Witch Doctor w/ Fire Bats - the Gold Runestone's ONLY effect difference is that the damage your bats do, steals some health. Where as the Crimson Runestone summons larger bats, 40 yard radius, doin 208% fire damage. The Crimson Runestone is one tier lower, but actually does MORE damage than the Golden Runestone, which is one tier higher, which just gives the advantage of stealing life.

So you're completely off in stating that the higher the tier, the more power, which isn't always the case, thus doesn't "limit" anything in regards to "everyone is going to use the same thing because the highest tier is the strongest", which simply is completely false.

It depends on playstyle, preference and what the Runestones actually do.

Hell, the Obsidian Runestone for Fire Bats, the highest tier Runestone, plagues enemies in an area, with slowly increased damage that can increase to 162% as poison (going on first level of skills) which is LESS than the 208% fire damage done by the Crimson Runestone at the same level.

Blizzard stated they did this on purpose, the mechanics of what I'm explaining, so that skills would not become "obsolete", so that information and your understanding of how the system works is completely inaccurate. They did it so that, if someone wanted to continue using Plague of Toads forever, they could, because the skill would level up with you, and higher tier of the same Runestone would prevent the skill from becoming obsolete because, hell, some people might love throwing toads around.

So, again, the whole "Are you really going to use the base skill over the rune that just increases its range with no tradeoff?" is TOTALLY inaccurate in regards to how the system works.

Maybe you should have done more research, because you're completely misinformed.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should get in the beta and play it like I have since October because that is EXACTLY how they work. The base skills are made worthless by the very first rune.

DH first rune makes base Caltrops worthless--it just increases the snare.
DH first rune makes Hungering Arrow worthless--it just increases the piercing chance.
DH first rune makes Bola Shot worthless--it just increases the explosion radius.
WD first tune makes poison dart worthless--it just shoots three instead of one.

You have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Katalysis said:
Maybe you should get in the beta and play it like I have since October because that is EXACTLY how they work. The base skills are made worthless by the very first rune.

DH first rune makes base Caltrops worthless--it just increases the snare.
DH first rune makes Hungering Arrow worthless--it just increases the piercing chance.
DH first rune makes Bola Shot worthless--it just increases the explosion radius.
WD first tune makes poison dart worthless--it just shoots three instead of one.

You have no idea what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

Thx captain obvious for pointing out that a rune'd skill is better than one without a rune. And your point is what exactly?

It does not mean that a lvl 5 rune will be less effective in certain builds than the same skill with a lvl 60 rune.
 
A Blizzard community manager has told gamers to lower their expectations for the upcoming Diablo III hack and slash RPG, a surprising comment that might cause some fans of the Diablo series considerable concern.

“On a more serious note, I too worry that we won't be able to meet the expectations people have built up for themselves,” wrote community manager Bashiok. “Part of my job is managing people's expectations, so... eh... stop it. Stop thinking about how awesome this game could be. Just imagine it's a new M. Night Shyamalan movie. Sure Sixth Sense was amazing and Unbreakable had it's moments, but this right here is the sequel to The Village ... or The Happening ... or Signs ... or any of the movies besides the two I first mentioned. So just like, lower those expectations, but still definitely buy the game please, and everything will be just fine. K?”

This honesty may come as a shock to many who are used to community managers acting like part of a company's PR team, refusing to accept any blame and constantly twisting a situation so that it reads as positively for the company as possible.

Bashiok makes some good points about the hype surrounding Diablo III. It's been 12 years since the last Diablo game and 11 years since Blizzard began working on Diablo III. An announcement only came in 2008, but it's easy to see why players are expecting great things, given the long development process.

The problem is that if players are being told to expect just a good game rather than a huge improvement over the previous ones, Blizzard could run the risk of losing a lot of its frenzied customers. Given that the release of the game is only months away, that's probably a very unwise thing to do.
Click to expand...
http://vr-zone.com/articles/blizzard-tells-gamers-to-lower-expectations-for-diablo-iii/14997.html

Jeez. Blizz knows D3 is a dud. Lower your expectations but please buy our product? Wtf?
 
still considering the games rep this thread as a whole is pretty weak, i thought it would of exploded more with alot more OMG this is incredible posts but alot of people are trying to convince themselves its good with posts the size of small novels, tbh the more i read about this game more I'am not even going to bother even playing it and that's so sad because i play all blizzard games, and i hate RTS but they seem to make it enjoyable through there world and characters even wow looked OK to me, ive never played it only because i may get to much into it :)

SC2 was a gem for RTS how they kept such uniqueness to the missions all 26 of them, but i look at d3 and its gameplay and general style and it just dosn't draw me in, ever since the loss of the stat points alone i've had a fair ammount of interest withdrawn

Look at Skyrim and how in-depth that is blizzard, and how popular it is, not because its linear and streamlined but because it has freedom and complexity that is why it is winning so fucking [h]ard right now

Look at alan wake highly anticipated and near the finish line it changes teams and is a game nothing like its promised, it receives a luke warm reception at most from my point of view

Why are you selling out to a crowd like this blizzard, they can't truly respect a game of this genre that will have you selling multilayer keys for the next 10 years, your selling out to a system that will be obsolete in 3 years max, why?

btw it will be hilarious when 14 year olds born in 1998 say diablo 3 is a try hard dragon age clone or someshit, considering diablo 1 was released in 96, and they forget about it 2 weeks time and go back to bobbys COD
 
Last edited:
Acoustique said:
Look at Skyrim and how in-depth that is blizzard, and how popular it is, not because its linear and streamlined but because it has freedom and complexity that is why it is winning so fucking [h]ard right now
Click to expand...

Skyrim isn't very in depth, it has a weak crafting system and the radiant A.I that was supposed to be revolutionary, only gives you fetch quests. Even this game was dumbed down from the older Elder Scrolls games.

Bad example. One thing it did have going for it that Diablo doesn't have was excellent PR. We knew what we were getting before the game launched. Maybe that is a bad thing, but at least they didn't lie to us. (character customization)
 
Acoustique said:
Why are you selling out to a crowd like this blizzard, they can't truly respect a game of this genre that will have you selling multilayer keys for the next 10 years, your selling out to a system that will be obsolete in 3 years max, why?
Click to expand...

All for that piece of paper with George's head on it. That's why.
 
Can anyone let me play their Diablo 3 beta at this point? I don't have any blizzard accounts so I didn't get in on it.
 
topslop1 said:
Can anyone let me play their Diablo 3 beta at this point? I don't have any blizzard accounts so I didn't get in on it.
Click to expand...

Yea...I don't think that will happen. You're not missing a whole lot if that makes you feel better.
 
Last edited:
You don't have to actually own any Blizzard products to make a Battle.Net account and opt in to the beta. I don't know what difference in "chances" there is on getting in, but as they say...you can't win if you don't play.

 
ScretHate said:
http://vr-zone.com/articles/blizzard-tells-gamers-to-lower-expectations-for-diablo-iii/14997.html

Jeez. Blizz knows D3 is a dud. Lower your expectations but please buy our product? Wtf?
Click to expand...

I'm in absolute shock that a blizzard rep actually wrote this (yeah i know, he says he's not a pr rep, but in fact, every blizzard employee is a pr rep for the company). If this quote is real, and spreads far enough, I would be willing to bet sales will be down from what they would have been.
 
complexx said:
I'm in absolute shock that a blizzard rep actually wrote this (yeah i know, he says he's not a pr rep, but in fact, every blizzard employee is a pr rep for the company). If this quote is real, and spreads far enough, I would be willing to bet sales will be down from what they would have been.
Click to expand...

We should applaud him for being honest and candid. The last thing we need is silence and/or more emotionless copy pasted statements that have been read countless times over.
 
Decko87 said:
Well the hype people are generating for this game is kind of out of hand. I think people are expecting too much from it, but it will be enjoyable for sure.
Click to expand...

Well, I think after a game has been in development for 11 years, it's perfectly normal to expect something extra-ordinary. Diablo 1 and 2 were gaming industry changing games. Blizzard has completely set up their customer base for dissapointment because of their OCD development of this game. It's one thing to sit down and state that we don't want to release a buggy game because our customers expect perfection from us, but they aren't developing an automobile here where the consequences are life threatening. They are writing code that no matter how long they wait will ALWAYS have bugs that need to be fixed after release. Considering its a fairly simple play style, isn't terribly complicated from a playability standpoint, the management overseeing the development of this game failed. When you release the third edition of a simple game, unless you have something up your sleeve to cause another revolution, you simply cannot let the development drag out like this.
 
Blizzard can't seem to get much of anything with with D3 since they might be trying to please too many people. Expectations should be high for this game, because its Blizzard and the games are generally great. I wonder if the guys making Torchlight 2 are giggling to themselves right now.
 
I wonder if the guys making Torchlight 2 are giggling to themselves right now.
Click to expand...

Considering that the developers for Torchlight 2 are making videos starting out sitting there, drinking juice, and petting a dog. Then spouting for all of 5 seconds that they are on their second wave of polish and hope to be done"soon". No they aren't...they are in the same arrogant mindset that blizzard is in.
 
XvMMvX said:
Considering that the developers for Torchlight 2 are making videos starting out sitting there, drinking juice, and petting a dog. Then spouting for all of 5 seconds that they are on their second wave of polish and hope to be done"soon". No they aren't...they are in the same arrogant mindset that blizzard is in.
Click to expand...

Yeah, damn those small team developers for posting a funny video.
 
Actuary said:
Thank god Diablo 2 didn't have any skills like that. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The main difference being that Diablo 2 had a skill tree and specializing in a certain type of attack took a lot of skill points. The skills in Diablo 2 that affected damage also normally affected multiple skills. I don't see point of a having a rune for a single skill that does nothing more than slightly increase it's damage. Why not just increase the base damage on the skill instead of having a rune that does it when you could instead have a rune that actually changes the gameplay of the skill?
 
Last edited:
NoOther said:
That is just it, the more stats you have that people can abuse, the harder it is to balance. Everytime you give a new option it exponentially increases the things someone can do with it. Especially if you are able to use a hack or bug and take advantage of it even more. Add in the fact you are now playing online with a bunch of other people and it now exponentially changes the experience of your game. Now someone else has an unfair advantage abusing a stat or using a hack over someone who is playing normally.

Everytime you add something, you have to monitor and check for it. Everytime you monitor and check for something it takes more resources and starts to limit some of the things you might be able to do. When you have a lot of people online using a lot of resources, then you introduce a whole new level of problems.

So you see, each action creates a huge ripple that costs more and more and more. And each cost is different. Sure they may upset some hardcore gamers by dumbing down some things, but how many more people will they end up making happy, and how easy will it be for them to maintain their happiness? That is the trade off they are dealing with.
Click to expand...

The game is not casual enough and needs to be dumbed down more. They should get rid of all skills and anything that has numbers. That way they can easily balance the game and tell how us how the game should be played. Heck they should even choose the equipment for the characters too. maybe even put in an auto control feature as well.

After playing the beta through with 3 of the characters, I'm disappointed in the lack of custimization; thanks to no skill tree, every character of the same class is the same with the exception of gear. Maybe it will be better with the full version but so far I'm not impressed with the dumbing down of the game.

It's still a fun game though.
 
Last edited:
TheCommander said:
The game is not casual enough and needs to be dumbed down more. They should get rid of all skills and anything that has numbers. That way they can easily balance the game and tell how us how the game should be played. Heck they should even choose the equipment for the characters too. maybe even put in an auto control feature as well.

It's still a fun game though.



After playing the beta through with 3 of the characters, I'm disappointed in the lack of custimization; thanks to no skill tree, every character of the same class is the same with the exception of gear. Maybe it will be better with the full version but so far I'm not impressed with the dumbing down of the game.
Click to expand...

It is laughable to equate no skill trees to mean there is a lack of customization for your character.

It's quite the opposite actually if you consider at lvl 60 you'll have only 6 skill slots but 20-25 skills to choose from (depending on class) each one with 5 different skill runes. You'll probably never find another player who is using the same 6 skill setup as you. The customization is there, as well as the freedom to chose and change your skills as you please.
 
Valshistixol said:
The main difference being that Diablo 2 had a skill tree and specializing in a certain type of attack took a lot of skill points. The skills in Diablo 2 that affected damage also normally affected multiple skills. I don't see point of a having a rune for a single skill that does nothing more than slightly increase it's damage. Why not just increase the base damage on the skill instead of having a rune that does it when you could instead have a rune that actually changes the gameplay of the skill?
Click to expand...

A similar argument could have been made for the corresponding Diablo 2 skills.
 
Valshistixol said:
The main difference being that Diablo 2 had a skill tree and specializing in a certain type of attack took a lot of skill points. The skills in Diablo 2 that affected damage also normally affected multiple skills. I don't see point of a having a rune for a single skill that does nothing more than slightly increase it's damage. Why not just increase the base damage on the skill instead of having a rune that does it when you could instead have a rune that actually changes the gameplay of the skill?
Click to expand...

D2 also didn't start out like that - if I remember correctly the damage multipliers that were cross-skill were patched in.
 
TwistedAegis said:
D2 also didn't start out like that - if I remember correctly the damage multipliers that were cross-skill were patched in.
Click to expand...

I think people have completely forgotten just how bad D2 was at release, and only remember how good it became after the expansion and a couple years of patches.

I got in the beta in one of the last waves, messed around with it a bit, and simply decided that I'm not going to spoil myself by getting all worked up (neither negatively nor positively) until the game is actually released. Still a day 1 buy for me.
 
Mabu said:
I think people have completely forgotten just how bad D2 was at release, and only remember how good it became after the expansion and a couple years of patches.

I got in the beta in one of the last waves, messed around with it a bit, and simply decided that I'm not going to spoil myself by getting all worked up (neither negatively nor positively) until the game is actually released. Still a day 1 buy for me.
Click to expand...

I agree. I don't think it's fair to get completely worked up over a small playable portion of the game in BETA that is still being constantly changed and tweaked. As the game comes out hopefully it will be fun and if there are any glaring mistakes, then hopefully patches can fix them. I can't remember a time that Blizzard has ever really let me down (from a gaming perspective) before.
 
ocellaris said:
Blizzard can't seem to get much of anything with with D3 since they might be trying to please too many people.
Click to expand...


I have a solution. Make a Diablo game. Look back at previous Diablo games and build on those. Blizzard needs to quit trying to re invent this game. Its fun for what it is and people like it for what it is. It doesn't need major changes.
 
sekira05 said:
It is laughable to equate no skill trees to mean there is a lack of customization for your character.

It's quite the opposite actually if you consider at lvl 60 you'll have only 6 skill slots but 20-25 skills to choose from (depending on class) each one with 5 different skill runes. You'll probably never find another player who is using the same 6 skill setup as you. The customization is there, as well as the freedom to chose and change your skills as you please.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because there weren't cookie cutter skill setups in Guild Wars or anything...
 
DSee said:
Sorry to ask this.. But how it is compared to D2/LOD?
Click to expand...

I'll go with the cop-out answer. I can't know for sure until the game is out and we explore everything about it, just like with D2. If you wanna compare the early game of both, D3 is much more involved, but the atmosphere is way different. It's not really to my liking, but it doesn't bother me either.
 
Mabu said:
I think people have completely forgotten just how bad D2 was at release, and only remember how good it became after the expansion and a couple years of patches.

I got in the beta in one of the last waves, messed around with it a bit, and simply decided that I'm not going to spoil myself by getting all worked up (neither negatively nor positively) until the game is actually released. Still a day 1 buy for me.
Click to expand...

Diablo 2 wasn't bad at release, not at all. I think what you've completely forgotten when judging a game is to factor in previous titles of the time. People playing Diablo 2 at release were likely already fans of Diablo 1, which was still enjoyable, but had far fewer features in comparison. So even simple concepts like the Necromancer's skeleton army or a Amazon multi-shot were new and exciting. "You mean I can be a Necromancer and have a blood golem fight and heal me?! That's way cooler than just the normal golem like in Diablo 1!". That was the reality of it.

TwistedAegis said:
D2 also didn't start out like that - if I remember correctly the damage multipliers that were cross-skill were patched in.
Click to expand...

Correct. Patch 1.10 if I remember correctly.
 
PornoSatan said:
Diablo 2 wasn't bad at release, not at all. I think what you've completely forgotten when judging a game is to factor in previous titles of the time. People playing Diablo 2 at release were likely already fans of Diablo 1, which was still enjoyable, but had far fewer features in comparison. So even simple concepts like the Necromancer's skeleton army or a Amazon multi-shot were new and exciting. "You mean I can be a Necromancer and have a blood golem fight and heal me?! That's way cooler than just the normal golem like in Diablo 1!". That was the reality of it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. When a it's time to pump a sequel out, you should be adding feature, not removing them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top