Live data from Hacker News

Diablo

filfre.net

71–80 of 128 posts

Re: Diablo

#71
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always loved this series. The problem, as I see it, is that the focus is always on tweaking the "endgame." I just find this to be silly. Once you get to the endgame it's pointless, and people basically blaze through the base game on purpose. And once you get there it really is no more than a slot machine that caters to people with serious gambling addictions. You run the same dungeons over and over again, someti…

> I feel like, particularly with the new Diablo 4 they could make the leveling curve on the base game last MUCH, MUCH longer and it would actually be far more enjoyable for far more people. It would piss off the endgame crowd though, because all they want to do is get to max level as fast as possible so they can start farming. They just did this, and made the game much more of a slow grind. Diablo 4's greatest flaw,…

[deleted]

Re: Diablo

#72
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the difference is grinding against a challenge and grinding against RNG

How is that material in any way?

Consistently defeating the Dark Souls boss requires skill. You have to learn how to beat it. The improvement comes from within yourself, and your ability to recognize what you are doing wrong. Knowing how to beat a boss is like a puzzle or a skill, even if it's a trivial skill less useful than a party trick. You have to analyze the boss, form a strategy, and adjust your strategy until you reach the desired outcome.

Diablo progression is just beating a pinata until it pops. You do the same thing over and over again until you get the outcome you want. It's about as intellectually engaging as cookie clicker.

Re: Diablo

#73
post #69

Diablo is the original "anti-souls" game. The slot machine mechanics, the lacking of significant strategic elements and sense of hollow progression have always been key factors for my dissatisfaction with it. That said, the beautiful / dreadful / horror vibe and simplicity of the first game to this day regularly pull me in – only to ultimately dissatisfy me greatly. Each time. To me there is just "no there there" - a…

I made a post the other day about diablo being a clicker game https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36328358

No joke, I just discovered Cookie Clicker a couple of weeks ago (sorry, I guess I’ve been under a rock) and it struck me that CC is a greatly distilled and simplified version of Diablo and pretty much all ARPGs. Perform some action to get resources to get a thing that will let you collect more resources that will let you get a better thing etc. A dopamine factory.

The differences are just implementation details and art/style/setting.

Re: Diablo

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the lacking of significant strategic elements Planning for your gear and doing sims / optimizing are strategic elements, though potentially a meta-strategy?

That was a thing in Diablo 2 and that's when the IP peaked, this got lost with Diablo 3 and, i believe even more so with Diablo 4.. all the builds are all discovered and in front of you, there is no tinkering with incredible skill interaction possible like we used to do in Diablo 2 It's kinda similar to how Bethesda manages the Elder Scrolls IP, ~ a decade between titles and they casualize(? is it a word)/simplify me…

I don't understand how people can praise the game design of Dark Souls and then say that Elden Ring is better. Elden Ring is the trashy mass appeal cousin.

* Most major bosses are gimmicky

* The open world encourages running past everything across pretty but boring fields and eschewing interesting level design

* The platforming is goofy and bad and relies heavily on awkwardly not dying as you fall vague heights

* There's a huge amount of tedious content. And you're highly likely to encounter enemies that are genuinely too strong for your character that just kind of shits on you for exploring the wrong way; or likewise content that you arrive at and are disappointed to find it's pointlessly easy.

The game was still good but it would have been much better if they cut out 3/4 of the mini dungeons, chopped the map area in half, and put more love and effort into the legacy dungeons.

Re: Diablo

#75
post #70
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I feel like, particularly with the new Diablo 4 they could make the leveling curve on the base game last MUCH, MUCH longer and it would actually be far more enjoyable for far more people. It would piss off the endgame crowd though, because all they want to do is get to max level as fast as possible so they can start farming. They just did this, and made the game much more of a slow grind. Diablo 4's greatest flaw,…

After ~25 years of playing this sort of game, I am increasingly sympathetic to the idea that exponential-power leveling is just a busted mechanic. There's a variety of good ways to use it, but there isn't a great way. You can lean into it, like Disgaea, which just embraces the brokenness and writes them into its mechanics. You can just sort of write a standard game, but then, in the end, the solution to all problems…

There are games where the final score is primarily based on taking as little time as possible (e.g. the Heroes of Might and Magic series, which had its debut around the same time as Diablo); this tends to keep exponential leveling mechanics in check.

Re: Diablo

#76
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always loved this series. The problem, as I see it, is that the focus is always on tweaking the "endgame." I just find this to be silly. Once you get to the endgame it's pointless, and people basically blaze through the base game on purpose. And once you get there it really is no more than a slot machine that caters to people with serious gambling addictions. You run the same dungeons over and over again, someti…

> I feel like, particularly with the new Diablo 4 they could make the leveling curve on the base game last MUCH, MUCH longer and it would actually be far more enjoyable for far more people. It would piss off the endgame crowd though, because all they want to do is get to max level as fast as possible so they can start farming. They just did this, and made the game much more of a slow grind. Diablo 4's greatest flaw,…

The latest updated tried to address this somewhat.

> Level scaling inside dungeons and most overworld territories has been adjusted in World Tiers III and IV. Monsters will begin to trail behind the player in Level after a certain point (up to a maximum of 5 Levels behind). This change does not affect World Bosses, Legion Events, Fields of Hatred, Helltide, or Nightmare Dungeons.

Due to the nature of level scaling, if you're 5 levels over an enemy you basically vaporize them. There is still level variance among the world zones as well. So with the combination of the two, you should always be able to find someplace a bit more challenging and when you're higher level you can find areas with lots of enemies lower than you. I haven't played enough post-patch to know if it's made the experience any better, but I'm not the type of Diablo player to seek out areas with weaker enemies.

What Blizzard wanted to avoid is having 4/5ths of the map no longer relevant because you're so far above the area level that you no longer get usable XP, loot or gold. In D3 there wasn't much to do at the high end other than run rifts. In D4 the entire world is a viable place to spend time during the late game.

Re: Diablo

#77

Diablo is the original "anti-souls" game. The slot machine mechanics, the lacking of significant strategic elements and sense of hollow progression have always been key factors for my dissatisfaction with it. That said, the beautiful / dreadful / horror vibe and simplicity of the first game to this day regularly pull me in – only to ultimately dissatisfy me greatly. Each time. To me there is just "no there there" - a…

i really feel the need to object to calling some grindy trash as "anti souls" as if dark souls is the archetypal game that is not shallow. I like dark souls (and love sekiro, and shrug at elden ring).

But there's a lot of games out there with depth. And frankly, a lot of people get through dark souls with luck and jank. Especially elden ring with its summons. That you can beat the game with sheer grit and dodges is a different thing.

Re: Diablo

#78

Diablo is the original "anti-souls" game. The slot machine mechanics, the lacking of significant strategic elements and sense of hollow progression have always been key factors for my dissatisfaction with it. That said, the beautiful / dreadful / horror vibe and simplicity of the first game to this day regularly pull me in – only to ultimately dissatisfy me greatly. Each time. To me there is just "no there there" - a…

I've always loved this series. The problem, as I see it, is that the focus is always on tweaking the "endgame." I just find this to be silly. Once you get to the endgame it's pointless, and people basically blaze through the base game on purpose. And once you get there it really is no more than a slot machine that caters to people with serious gambling addictions. You run the same dungeons over and over again, someti…

> Once you get to the endgame it's pointless, and people basically blaze through the base game on purpose. And once you get there it really is no more than a slot machine that caters to people with serious gambling addictions.

Feels like you're missing the point of end-game players. It's not the slot machine. It's pushing further and further into end-game content. It's a race to see who can dive deeper into dungeons and what builds are necessary to push to the true "end game". Diablo, the campaign, is and has always been trivially easy. Super high levels of these dungeons stack up so many resistance penalties and the level difference adds so much damage reduction (for enemies) and increase (for you) that it becomes much more of a skill based game. This is what I play these games for. Not the campaign that you can sleep through.

For my wife, the game ends when we kill the big baddie together on normal difficulties. For me that's when the content just starts getting interesting. There is a lot of grinding involved, but you're having to pay so much more attention to what abilities / upgrades / paragon selections you make none of which are important at all for the main campaign.

Re: Diablo

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's more of a side effect of them wanting it to be a "game as a service", they need everything to be streamlined and balanced.. wich removes a lot of the fun.. I wish they'd have made D4 a proper single player game instead of an MMO, and let your community mod your game Look at D2 and the sheer amount of mods.. same for Warcraft 3..

I can see glimpses of what they were going for with online multiplayer in D4. There's some fun there, but I think it's currently a net negative. It forces them to balance tightly, but I don't need D4 to be perfectly balanced - just fun. Some of the best games I've ever played have had horribly broken balance - final fantasy 6 (3) and final fantasy tactics just to name two off the top of my head.

World events with online players have the potential to be much better. I'm hopeful it'll evolve over time. That being said, D4 is not even close to being balanced perfectly. There are orders of magnitude of power level in difference between classes and builds. At least if you measure them against "end game content" and not the campaign which can be completed with any class / skill selection.

Re: Diablo

#80
I caused physical damage to my hand with Diablo 1 and all the incessant clicking (vs the "hold to attack and keep attacking" mechanic in D2 and D3).

I had some good times in D2, played it pretty deeply until I got to the Physical Immunes. That's when I gave up because I didn't want to have to level up, regear, and respec a new character.

I played D3 when it first came out, the Real Money Auction House destroyed that game as it became a game of "gold", not gear. The "world wide" loot table just wrecked it. When you have a 1 in 10M chance of getting the right weapon drop, that's only "1 in 10" across a million players, but it's still 1 in 10M for you. You also had to become knowledgeable about not just your own class and gear, but every other class and gear so your Barbarian doesn't salvage some random Staff that may have been one of those 1 in 10M drops for a Sorcerer, and thus worth a heap of currency.

D3 rewards time invested, especially later on. It rewards skill to a point, but in the end, it's determination to grind long enough to get enough gear and to get the right level to clear the content. You watch videos of someone clearing high level content, and it's almost always the same map they're clearing as some maps are outright impossible to succeed on compared to others. When it's all boiled down, it makes the end game pretty moot.

That said, I like the dynamic playstyle of D3. An "ok" geared Demon Hunter is a cat on fire through the levels, obliterating everything and everyone, and it's just flat giggly fun. And I liked the story of D3, it was a great story.

Post reply on HN