Time Capsule from PoE Closed Beta -- a classic PoE vs D3 thread circa 2012

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

"

kodr wrote:

@CharanJaydemyr: heh, in fact, I just saw you were the original poster ^^;
I wasn't targetting anyone in particular, but when I saw the title of your thread, I still thought "damn, another one like that..." because there was already a bunch of threads bashing D3 ^^;
But you are articulate, it's a lot better to read your post than the usual "if u lyk D3 u suk noob!" ^^;

I re-read your post, and it seems your problem with D3 is the removal of the gem system.
So, after playing PoE, what do you think of the skills?
Do you think you have more freedom?
Which character did you play?
As for D3, did you read the description of other skills (runed or not)?

You're dead on. I was absolutely in love with the proposed D3 skill rune system. It's not hard to imagine why: these runes didn't just buff a skill, they dramatically transformed it. Speaking just about the Wizard: Magic missiles turning to fire, magic weapon *also* turning to fire, a point-blank AoE changing to instant damage rather than DoT, meteor *changing to ice*...stuff like that is the drug of choice for a thematically-driven altaholic. A fire-based melee wizard was my first plan, and I had it all planned out. Excel spreadsheets and all.

And yeah, I spent a long time going through the skills/rune/passives of all five D3 classes. I had a passive sword-swinging Demon Hunter planned, and played it through the beta easily enough. It was really pushing it, but still, sword-swinging hooded speedy acrobatic badass had to be attempted! Monk, Barbarian and Witch Doctor had a lot less flexibility in my eyes, but they were very, very fun to play. I enjoyed PLAYING Diablo 3: it's a very fluid, exciting experience. But I wasn't enjoying playing the characters I'd made. Does that make sense? It wasn't fulfilling for me. I was holding out for runes, and then...

Naturally none of that is happening anymore, not the way I planned it, not the way it was offered. I've explained that much. It's fact, not opinion. History.

So to PoE: I think the skills are for the most part stock-standard Diablo skills. Hasty melee attacks, AoE melee, fire rain, ice projectiles, leap attacks, multi-arrow shooting...all that. But since they're attached to gem and not class, the combination possibilities are instantly greater. And the support gems modify them in fairly interesting ways. So if you want, you can say the active skills aren't that impressive, but what you can do with them are.

In that, I feel like I have a lot of freedom. I do believe the classes are still distinct and that 'skill choice' is not the only way to define a class.

I first played a Duelist, not really shaking the passive tree too hard: sword, armguard, melee skills, focus on fire damage (...can you tell I like fire damage in these games? Burning DoT rocks my world). I have created Charan in many contexts, and certain constants must remain: fire damage, sword, agility, life regen and stealth/teleporting preferable. PoE really offers all of those.

Right now I'm hopping between Aen (A Templar dual-wand user), SavageSeamstress (rapier-wielding Ranger), Orchid_Witherheart (dagger-witch: she's my most challenging character!) and Kajino_Kitaro (fire-exclusive Duelist with firestorm on LMB). I love 'em all. I love that this game has enough wiggle room for me to make them. I don't do it just to be contrary or difficult. These are established characters I've tried elsewhere. They are old friends who had no place in D3.

...They'll have no place in GW2 either, for the most part, but I can easily imagine Charan as a thief. Shadowstep sword+dagger attacks, fiery sword...hood...oh yeah, bring. it. on.

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

Naturally none of that is happening anymore, not the way I planned it, not the way it was offered. I've explained that much. It's fact, not opinion. History.

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

I first played a Duelist, not really shaking the passive tree too hard: sword, armguard, melee skills, focus on fire damage (...can you tell I like fire damage in these games? Burning DoT rocks my world). I have created Charan in many contexts, and certain constants must remain: fire damage, sword, agility, life regen and stealth/teleporting preferable. PoE really offers all of those.

Right now I'm hopping between Aen (A Templar dual-wand user), SavageSeamstress (rapier-wielding Ranger), Orchid_Witherheart (dagger-witch: she's my most challenging character!) and Kajino_Kitaro (fire-exclusive Duelist with firestorm on LMB). I love 'em all. I love that this game has enough wiggle room for me to make them. I don't do it just to be contrary or difficult. These are established characters I've tried elsewhere. They are old friends who had no place in D3.

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

GREAT contribution. But on the point of the balance between 'hardcore' and 'accessible,' allow me to tell you a little story, if I may...

A long time ago (I think it was 2006), I had to interview a book editor, mostly ascertaining her job, learning the ins and outs -- basically, we just had a chat. After we'd gotten past my scripted queries, I was comfortable to ask her more informal, personal questions about the business. This was slightly before the Twilight phenomenon took off, so I framed the question a little differently than I would today, but what I asked was, 'how do you define a successful book?' She was too smart to simply say 'ones that make lots of money.' Her answer (I have it written down, of course, but I can paraphrase it at any time) really reminded me why people create art, whatever the medium:

'The idea of success depends on the book, of course. If we think it's going to be a big seller, then naturally that's what want. But then there are all the other books, the literary novels that might not sell anywhere near as much as a best-seller but are in our eyes important works that should be published, that we'd be proud to publish. They might only sell five or ten thousand copies, but we sell less...challenging books across the board to cover the cost of supporting writers who might not write to such a large audience.'

THAT was a profound thing to hear! Because I do like some books that really aren't that popular, but deserve to be read. Books that deserve to exist and which, as a publisher, are a delight and privilege to support. Now, these books ARE still read, but generally they're not for newbies to serious reading. Maybe a serious reader might recommend it to someone they think will enjoy it. Maybe Oprah jumped on it (...sigh). Point is, not all books are primarily for newcomers. Not all TV shows are either. And most art really isn't. This isn't to say that newcomers can't appreciate them, or perhaps more appropriate learn *how* to appreciate them.

Why should games be any different? We have a mass of accessible games that present tutorials, popup tool tips, quick time events, user-friendly stuff. It's virtually the modus operandi of the AAA title. And I think that's just the way it should be -- lowest common denominator and all that. But indeed, if the lady editor was anything close to right, some games deserve to be made, to be supported, even fully knowing those games won't be best-sellers, won't fly off the shelves. They still deserve to be made because they're *good*. And in the case of PoE, I'm afraid part of what makes it that is the initially daunting user interface. And those who truly appreciate that (newcomer or vet, I've seen delight in the proverbial eyes of both upon beholding PoE) will also understand that if they ever want something simpler, something a little less uncompromising, there are any number of games out there that offer that too.

"

MrTastix wrote:

I love the profoundness of the answer that editor gave you but I feel that you can't compare the book industry with the gaming industry, it's like comparing apples and oranges.

Time, money and effort spent for a video game is not the same as it is for a book. Yes, both forms of media will chew through your cash very quickly, but for two very different reasons.

The issue with video games is not the games themselves nor who develop them but the people who play them. I actually agree that certain games should be created for niche communities, much like there are niche communities for books, music and films. However, a few things should be noted:

1. Your ultimate goal in business should be to make money first. Anything else is secondary. I know many corporations may not agree with this - especially small businesses - but you cannot provide good quality content without a staple amount of money. The two do go hand-in-hand however: Have good content and you'll probably make more money.

2. As stated, GGG is a very minor company in comparison to the other big-name companies trying their luck with MMOs. GGG is also entering a very niche community; They're fighting the convention by not making yet another WoW-esque MMO (and for that, I commend them). This, alongside their smaller size in comparison to other companies, makes their design choices even more important.

Their entire business model (an f2p MMO that challenges the WoW-esque norm) is a very risky model. It's something I've always wanted (minus the f2p thing -- not so concerned with that, if the price is right) but know that many companies today are very hesitant to release new IP on account of the risk-factor.

3. The gaming community, at times, can seem a lot more self-entitled than other entertainment industry fans (and no, I'm not referring to the ME3 movement, to which I am a supporter of). There are people who will voice their disdain much loudly than others and many, many people are used to the whole "instant gratification" method that games throw at them (I call this the "MMO Syndrome", as most MMOs use such methods).

4. A bit unrelated but never expect your client-base to "read the manual". Ever. Also never expect them to ask for help. I was always taught - and this is my number one rule for any design/development - to treat your consumers as mindless drones.

It sounds very demeaning, I know, and obviously I don't mean you go out and insult them or alienate them in some way. What I mean is that you write instructions and manuals which are easier to access, easy to find when needed again and easy to read.

Assume that they do not want to go on a website to read what could be displayed in the game much more conveniently -- in-game tutorials for new characters, that can be turned off in the Options for vets and a in-game "manual" that outlines basic game principles. Essentially, having a in-game manual is extremely beneficial and far more games need it.

Also assume they won't ask people for help. Some people don't want to or just don't know how (educate them on how to!). Yes, some people will but not everyone won't.

I understand that much of this is a lot of work and it's simply easy and cheaper to say "nah, screw those guys" but frankly, more developers need to add more in-depth documentation in general. For anything. The advent of the internet hasn't changed that #1 rule in programming, it shouldn't change it for anything else, either.

The work will pay off in the long run, trust me.

"

kodr wrote:

@CharanJaydemyr: mmmh ok I guess...
But I bet with the old system, you couldn't even get a powerful character with low level gems aswell...
I wonder if you could even get high level gems...
So... you would end up with the same problem, a character who can use his skills, but not as powerful as it could become.

As for PoE, how you don't have the same problem?
You get better support gems in higher difficulty level, don't you want to get them?
And you're not even sure to get them, because some of them randomly drop.
For example, I never got a chaos gem...