Blizzard Trashing Diablo III Skill Tree System
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Hm. I'm all for innovation, but I'm forced to do a little chicken/egg speculation here:
Was the decision to delay the game a result of them deciding to do this? Or did Blizzard tell the D3 team "Hey... uhm... yeah: it looks like you got a LOT more time to work on your game because of the way ACTIVISION excuse me, we want to stagger our releases... sooooo... Go hog wild!"
Something about the "[t]his new system is still in the development stages and if it does not work, we still have plenty of options to fall back on" quote makes me think it's the latter.
Was the decision to delay the game a result of them deciding to do this? Or did Blizzard tell the D3 team "Hey... uhm... yeah: it looks like you got a LOT more time to work on your game because of the way ACTIVISION excuse me, we want to stagger our releases... sooooo... Go hog wild!"
Something about the "[t]his new system is still in the development stages and if it does not work, we still have plenty of options to fall back on" quote makes me think it's the latter.
Those are the exact same thing except one has a slight cosmetic upgrade.Taawus said:
Blizzard self publish. Blizzard work autonomously from Activision. Blizzard have always set their ownsolidstatemind said:
How many more times must I iterate this?
Actualy the skill tree system only came in Diablo 2. The original Diablo skill levels were just another part of your gear progression. And since every other rpg&mmo have decided to copy on that system instead of inovating it. So if anyone, Blizzard are the guys that can move the genre forward.
And for the love of everything that is sacred, don't do skill-up on use. Unless it is balanced to be fool proof (in which case it becomes unnecessary) it is just a grind fest and just drains the fun of playing. (If you've played WoW as melee you know what I'm on about)
And for the love of everything that is sacred, don't do skill-up on use. Unless it is balanced to be fool proof (in which case it becomes unnecessary) it is just a grind fest and just drains the fun of playing. (If you've played WoW as melee you know what I'm on about)
Not to be confrontational, but what makes you an authority to claim this? I'm not saying you're wrong, just that Blizzard and Activision are a single business entity now, and a publicly-traded one at that. Rumors have been floating around about release conflicts between the companies since Activision Blizzard's chief financial officer, Thomas Tippl announced the revised schedule of releases for Blizzard. Regardless of how 'autonomous' you think Blizzard is from Activision, the fact that a Blizzard-Activision guy is the one who first mentioned it (and did so in the context of financial projections, no less) should at least hint that Blizzard is decidedly less than 'autonomous'.Amnestic said:
Again, not saying it's impossible that Blizzard still maintains a great deal of freedom and control, just that if you think nothing has changed from when they were an independent company... well, I think you're being a bit naive about how big business works. Blizzard is ultimately beholden to the shareholders of ATVI to protect their best interests, and that includes not self-competing... and thus, my speculation still stands in regards to the real reason Blizzard is making this change so late in the production cycle.
Blizzard wasn't an independent company before the merger, either. Blizzard was owned by Vivendi Universal. Vivendi's games division acquired Activision, whose name was changed to Activision-Blizzard to take advantage of the brand capital.solidstatemind said:
There's a much better summary of what actually happened around the site somewhere, but that's the general gist of it.
I'm not sure I like this. I really, really like the skill tree and talent tree designs, as they really allow a fluid progression in character strength, and allow for quite a bit of customization. Their new system must be pretty great to nudge such a well-tested design to the side.
The skill system needs rewamping. In Diablo 2 you had the issue of having to invest in early skills to survive, but those skillpoints would be lost, because later in the game you would only use the stronger skills. This created the incentive of not using skillpoints and playing a harder game early on in order to save them for the more powerful skills later.
So what Diablo really needs is a skill system where the skills you invest in always remain useful and don't become obsolete by later skills.
So what Diablo really needs is a skill system where the skills you invest in always remain useful and don't become obsolete by later skills.
Why does everyone seem surprised? This game is set to launch next time Cthulu wakes, so just wait a few eons.
Did you read the STARS tactics for Yogg+0? Because that encounter was anything but casual.Lt. Vinciti said:
FL+4 isn't exactly easy mode either. Or Firefighter. Or Sarth+3D 10 man at release.
But hey, keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel a little more pro.
What he said.Artemis923 said:
Blizzard seems to take the "If it ain't broke, fix it 'till it is" method or more like "we can design whatever the Hell we want, you WILL play it no matter what, because we are Blizzard, and you'll suck on anything we want you to". We are the droids, they are looking for. If the new system does suck, no matter. Since the players have only two options, get used to the system or don't play, it's fairly obvious most of them will choose the former, if for nothing else, peer pressure. Some even to the point of declaring it the new industry standard for it's "innovative approach" which means "nobody fucking understands how it works".
The people at Blizzard are getting so damn sure of themselves, that they think they can do anything, and get away with it. And the sad thing is, for the most part, they can...
There is a big difference between autonomous and independent. Prievious to the merger, I think it is reasonable to conclude that Blizzard was the 'Alpha Dog' in Vivendi's portfolio and thus was the first priority. (Jeez, the other companies were Sierra, Sierra Online, and Vivendi Mobile, FFS.) This afforded them primary consideration in business transactions like release schedules.CantFaketheFunk said:
Now that they are a part of a business that involves Activision-- you know, the same company that recently published a game that had a few sales... hm, I think it went by the name of Modern Warfare 2 or something? -- Blizzard isn't the only company that merits consideration on the release calendar.
I'm not saying this is bad or evil or wrong or anything-- it's just good business: don't compete against yourself. Therefore, I stand by my original statement: can we honestly say that the changing of talents caused the delay, or did the delay allow Blizzard to rework the talents?
