Diablo III / Diablo II Battle.net Thread

I got tired of looking for the spider caverns in act III (fuck that jungle- worst area of the game) so I booted up a maphack that I had used for single player and found it double quick. Problem is next time I tried to go on battle.net I found out I was banned. Bummer, hopefully no areas of Diablo III will be as tedious to search.
 
I love act 3, great amount of exploring you have to do. But, I'm also the type of person who likes to find all the optional caves and portals and such and do full clears of areas.

I can understand a3 being tedious for those who are just trying to beat the game or something.
 
All I can say is they better start ponying up some good info, because crap like this isn't heartwarming.....I'm particularly not fond of the stuff about point hoarding....


[quote name='Inside Mac Games']Diablo III Community Manager Bashiok has once again favored Blizzard Entertainment forum readers with a few bits of information about Diablo III, the upcoming continuation of the popular action RPG series. This time the discussion focused on the new look for skill trees in DIII, specifically addressing the concerns of fans who worry the trees are too similar to talent trees seen in World of Warcraft.
People are comparing the trees for a few reasons and using these reasons as negatives. I’ll try to cover them all.

1. “They look similar.“ Yes, they do. They’re both downward expanding trees, they both have icons that you can spend points in, they both have arrows that determine expansion into other skills. These were all features also in the Diablo II trees.

2. “It’s unoriginal.“ I agree. It’s only after 10 (?) or so working concepts of various other skill tree designs that we were able to arrive at the conclusion that this is a system that works and achieves the goals that we want to achieve (we showed those failed designs at BlizzCon btw). There’s no point in trying to put in something new and complex just for the sake of originality. When people play the game will they remember that it’s not new, or that it’s not fun?
I want to heavily stress again on this point that the skill trees are not finished, we’re still in the process of heavy iteration and experimentation.

3. “Point requirements to advance down the tree is lame.“ One of the main problems with the Diablo II trees was point hoarding, which was the act of holding on to all of your points until you are able to reach a skill you want to put points into. This may not be an issue to some players just because it’s so easily dismissed as ‘part of the game’, but from a designer perspective it’s a huge failure. You are giving the player a reward and they are hoarding those rewards because they have nothing enticing to spend them on. This was attempted to be remedied through a patch by introducing synergies, unfortunately they caused their own issues. World of Warcraft looking at the Diablo II trees for inspiration saw this flaw but took a different approach in solving it, instead implementing a point requirement to advance down the tree. The player now has to spend points to advance, and with that comes the ability to provide more impacting and meaningful places to spend them.

4. “Cookie cutter builds!“ Again these are skill trees, not talent trees. Every single ability you can cast/use is learned through spending points in the tree. This allows, in comparison, for a huge amount of customization. Now, that doesn’t escape the truth that there will always be builds considered to be the best, but that’s more an issue of balance, not skill tree layout design.
Also on that point, and I’ve said it before, character customization is a core design goal of the game. It’s one of a few, and that means that we’re not going to release the game unless we’re happy with the amount of customization available.​
[/quote]
 
What?? Point Hoarding was remedied by not being able to only put 1 skill point in a skill depending on your level. If you held 15 points to put into Frozen Orb and you reach level 30 and try to put all 15 into FO - all you can do is put 1 point into it.

Also, it's getting really annoying having Blizzard trickling little tiny ass details at a time. I think it's time to show another big thing! Aggravating.
 
Well there you go - Blizzard saying that "hey using the skill system we have from WoW cuts down on development time and gives us everything we want to do."

I never played D2 at the ....intensity others did, so I never latched onto point hoarding and all that sort of stuff. I guess it's going to make people mad in the same way things in any established game with a lot of players has going on, where some minute change alienates a fraction of people. There's really no way Blizzard can't annoy some people.

Oh well. Still looking forward to it. It is an agonizingly slow crawl though.
 
I'm looking forward to Diablo Tres. I've never played before but I want an RPG to fill the void that PSOBB left and PSU couldn't fill. I don't wanna try II cause I'm afraid I'll burn myself out before III comes out like I did with Melee before Brawl came out.
 
[quote name='SqueeMK2']D3 is likely so far out that you wouldn't have an issue with that. If we see it within a year I'll be surprised.[/quote]
I kinda want a fresh experience.
 
[quote name='Clarke']I kinda want a fresh experience.[/quote]

Two reasons why you should get D2:

1) Even after all these years, it's still insanely fun and has a huge player base. It is still the undisputed champion of the action RPG market (well, PC at least), not to mention the battlechest (D1 and D2 plus the expansion) on sale at GS for Gameday.

2) Based on what Blizz has said, they are pulling heavily for the Diablo Universe's back story for the plot, so you might be at a loss if you haven't played through D1 and D2.
 
I am downloading D2 right now to avoid the patch problems I had with WCIII, and it is really slow. I think it is going to take over an hour with a cable modem. Hopefully I will be able to restore at least 1 of my characters...If only my computer had a floppy drive. :(
 
Well, get ready to make new ladder character...which sucks because I just started a new paladin....although, this does eliminate the bot issue.

[quote name='Battle.net']
We’re preparing for a Diablo II ladder reset to coincide with the release of the 1.13 patch that’s currently in development. We don’t have a final release date for the patch yet, but we’re providing early warning as a reset could occur as early as the end of April. We’ll be providing updates with more certain dates once the patch is closer to release.

Please be aware that with a ladder reset all ladder characters are moved to non-ladder. This means that your characters will still be accessible but will no longer have access to ladder-only features and games. In order to play in the new ladder season after the reset you will need to make new ladder characters. [/quote]
 
I like playing Diablo 2 on my PC, I usually used Barbarian character because He could kill enemies easily than the other. Could anyone here tell me the new information about Diablo 3? ;)
 
Blizz said there would be test realms first, so doubt the ladder reset and patch are coming soon. I guess they could have scraped that plan though.
 
[quote name='Moxio']No loading screens, EVER: http://www.diablofans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19897

High probability of no P2P: http://www.diablofans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19943[/QUOTE]

A Blizzard Rep's post from your second link about someone's response to being asked about paying for Diablo III:

"Mike mentioned it in an Activision Blizzard investor meeting [paraphrased] "A player that buys Starcraft 2 at retail will have the ability to play on Battle.net with no additional fee."

I'll point out that this is a very carefully worded statement."
Click to expand...
Emphasis mine.

I really don't like the sound of that.
 
It is indeed carefully worded, but I think it'd be a really dick move on their part to force P2P and then, when questioned about that statement, to be like, "Oh, well technically we said no additional fee... additional on top of P2P...". I have faith they'll keep it free to play, and I don't mind them charging for extras like reviving hardcore characters as long as the charges are for nothing too important.
 
I was more concerned with how the question the rep was answering was about Diablo 3, but how their answer mentioned buying SCII at retail.

But maybe the answer he quoted was in regard to B.net 2 in general/in the lense of Starcraft. :/
 
Blizzard is on thin ice. If StarCraft II is free to play on Battle.net (which there is a very high probability it will be), it would be a poor choice to implement a P2P system for Diablo III only. It's this assumption (and a valid one I think) that extends that statement to D3.
 
Thin ice supported by pillars made of pure WoW money.

They can afford to do whatever the hell they want and it would not surprise me at all if there was a fee of some sort.
 
Blizzard is involved quite a bit more with their community than most, I'd say. I think it's safe to say there would be a huge backlash.

Now, I'm not saying that I wouldn't pay, because I would (at least until I finish multiplayer a few times, then I'd probably be done), and Blizzard would make money hand over fist, but I have faith that D3 will be free to play.
 
I want to believe, Moxio, but I don't know if I can. :[

Blizzard knows how big of an issue paying is for its community, and if they weren't going to charge, I don't know why they won't just come out and say that. It'd be huge news.
This ass-footing around makes me think that they're trying best to figure out how to charge somehow, even if not for actually playing.

Not to mention they've done some really, really stupid shit lately, like taking LAN out of SCII, and planning on shipping SCII without two of the campaigns (and assuming each campaign is is same length, that's two-thirds of the whole game).

Thin ice indeed. :whistle2:?
 
Charging for D3 would suck. If they plan to charge for D3 I might as well just renew World of Warcraft and keep playing that.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']shipping SCII without two of the campaigns (and assuming each campaign is is same length, that's two-thirds of the whole game).[/QUOTE]
but each campaign is supposedly much longer than the 10 - 12 missions that previous campaigns have been... i think their intention is to release 3 games, each one being as long as all the campaigns in SC combined, or all the campaigns in WC3 combined... you're still getting a full game, it just focuses on one race instead of all of them
 
I'm also quite pissed at the lack of LAN play in Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2. Removing LAN and focusing entirely on Battle.net seems like a good way to try to funnel people into spending money in arguably optional ways.

Though the removal of LAN by itself is enough for me to skip buying it. Didn't buy Hellgate London because it didn't have LAN, won't buy SC2 and D3 because of it. I use it too often for this type of game.
 
the only thing i can imagine is that it's a DRM thing, that they want to stop piracy without implementing any sort of annoying DRM -- a lot of people pirate SC and WC3 and play on private servers through the LAN option... forcing them onto bnet allows for cdkey checking.
 
They are very tricky with their wording. Blizzard said that they don't currently plan to support LAN play in Starcraft II. This could mean that they may change their minds, or it can mean that LAN play is still included, it just isn't supported by Blizzard. ie. if you have troubles getting LAN play to work, they aren't going to help you.

It is still possible that SCII will be able to be played via LAN. As others have said, there will almost certainly be the ability to make LAN games once you're inside battle.net. However, if you think about the potential for Battle.net 2.0 to be a shell program rather than simply a place you go to online to find games (Think Steam with a fancy interface and chat rooms ala battle.net currently), Blizzard may very well include the option to launch your battle.net 2.0 shell in "Offline Mode." This means that you'd have to authenticate at least once, but solves the problem of people not having any internet connection at all during LAN get togethers.

The other argument of people at LAN parties often have either no connection or shitty connection would be solved, as even a shitty connection could handle a quick authentication if they wanted to use Online Battle.net 2.0 for their LAN games (maybe they want to keep track of their wins and losses for online accounts). Or by launching in Offline Mode, stats would not be saved, but you wouldn't require a connection if you had previously authenticated and were all up to date.


Other things they could do is build a ping limit into the battle.net shell for LAN games. Even the shittiest of legit non-virtual LAN connections will have everyone at least under 100ms, usually in the 5-6ms range. Simply prevent any games over 100ms or some lower amount from appearing or being able to be joined. That would stop many hamachi/vpn users.
 
I have a couple of questions about the 'ladder'.

How do you know when it has been reset?

I know the ladder is a ranking system, but does it only apply to PvP?
 
1. People will be shitting their pants/The ladder will have a bunch of level 1's and 1 guy who is 95 the first day. Also any ladder characters from this ladder season will be magically transformed into non-ladder characters.

2. The ladder is solely based on the amount of exp you have. ie. what level you are.
 
are old games gonna be updated to use the new bnet? blizzard loves big patches.. i wouldn't put it past them..

i still love love love warcraft 3 but bnet's the worst part of it.

it'd also be nice to get some sort of update to d2 that improves latency.. but i don't know how likely (or possible) that is.
 
[quote name='crystalklear64']They are very tricky with their wording.[/QUOTE]
They were for a while, but they recently flat out said no LAN. For Starcraft 2 anyway, Diablo 3 is still in the "We don't have plans" phase as far as I know, which probably will mean no LAN.
Will StarCraft II be available on consoles, or over LAN?

We got quite different answers about local area networking (LAN), where both Dustin or Sigaty said they were still discussing it, however, Pardo knew immediately: "we don't have any plans to support LAN," he said and clarified "we will not support it." The only multiplayer available will be on Battle.net.
Click to expand...
http://www.incgamers.com/Interviews/190/StarCraftIIDevelopersTalk

And ping restrictions for LAN games won't really stop pirates either. If I remember right Gears of War and Dawn of War 2 have that and pirates got around it. Since there are already fully Battle.net emulators out there and even pirate World of Warcraft servers, I get the distinct feeling that cutting LAN is only going to be hurting people who buy the game, and the pirates will have a workaround running in no time.
 
Private WoW servers are just a drop in the bucket. The best antipiracy measures discourage/prevent the vast majority of people from downloading the game while not inconveniencing customers.

My 2 cents: antipiracy is a part of it, but I think Actard wants to bring as many people to bnet as possible because they'll turn it into their own digital distro service a la Steam. Remember when Steam started out, it was just for Valve games, matchmaking, updates. Only years later did it become king of digital distribution. The new bnet will be the groundwork for a true-and-true digital service.
 
No LAN doesn't bother me since I never play LAN, but all I'm really hoping for at this point is a quality game and free Battle.net online play.
 
[quote name='SqueeMK2']They were for a while, but they recently flat out said no LAN. For Starcraft 2 anyway, Diablo 3 is still in the "We don't have plans" phase as far as I know, which probably will mean no LAN.

http://www.incgamers.com/Interviews/190/StarCraftIIDevelopersTalk

And ping restrictions for LAN games won't really stop pirates either. If I remember right Gears of War and Dawn of War 2 have that and pirates got around it. Since there are already fully Battle.net emulators out there and even pirate World of Warcraft servers, I get the distinct feeling that cutting LAN is only going to be hurting people who buy the game, and the pirates will have a workaround running in no time.[/QUOTE]
They still have only said, we will not support it/it will not be supported in the quoted bit.

That, "the only multiplayer will be on battle.net" part is, for one, a conclusion jumped to by whoever wrote the article, and two, does not exclude LAN under the proposed offline mode.

You know how Left 4 Dead has split screen on the PC? I'm probably one of the few people who actually uses that, but its in there. However, it is entirely unsupported by Valve. Not having support is not the same thing as not existing.
 
That doesn't explain why they're being so underhanded and unclear about it. All they need to say is that "LAN will be there, but there'll be no technical support for it" and people will be happy.

Either they're not including it (which would be dumb), or they're going out of their way to alienate/irritate the fan base (also dumb).
 
The final "we will not support it" is what makes me think there won't be LAN. If there is actually LAN support, especially if it's "Same game and account" sharable like L4D LAN support (Two different machines logged into the same account in offline mode playing L4D together), then I'll be happy and go back to planning on buying Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3.

I do kinda hope they'll clarify it and actually have LAN in there though. I was really looking forward to Diablo 3, and figured I would buy Starcraft 2 even though Starcraft's my least favorite Blizzard game.
 
No LAN = no sale for this Diablo fan. I don't appreciate Blizzard trying to force me to use B.net for multiplayer. As for the anti-piracy, they better hope that the money they'll save by removing this feature will be greater than the money they'll lose when people such as myself will not buy it.
 
If the online service is good... then what's there to worry about?

Is there reason just to curb the cheating raping in d2?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top