Slashdot Mirror


Diablo 3 Developer Explains Health and Potion Changes

One of the new features in the upcoming Diablo 3 release is a change from the traditional potion-guzzling, inventory-clogging system of previous games to a new scheme in which monsters drop health orbs on the ground that refill your health when you touch them. Lead Designer Jay Wilson says the change makes for more varied gameplay and a more consistent way to scale difficulty. He told the Multiplayer blog: "When the player has similar downsides, it means we can make a lot more interesting monsters. We don't have to kill you to challenge you. We can make a monster that affects your mobility, we can make a monster that has different kinds of attacks that are dangerous to you and that you actually have to avoid. And so it makes the combat a lot more interesting."

177 comments

  1. Finally! by fructose · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thank goodness! No more 10 minute sessions of inventory management just to juggle your potions around.

    1. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Speak for yourself. That is what made the Diablo games different. In fact, the many hours that I spent playing Diablo and Diablo 2 gave me the inventory management experience to land me my dream job. You are currently reading the post of the Senior Late Night Inventory Management Specialist at Safeway Food and Drug, Whitefish, Montana.

    2. Re:Finally! by Moryath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I miss the days when inventory management was a challenge, rather than being simplified away into nothingness. Developers need to learn that just because you can simplify a game mechanic into meaningless doesn't mean you should; do it too much and too often, and you get today's dumbed-down pile of shovelware games.

      And yes, I had the same reaction to the dumbed-down "inventory" system of Deus Ex 2 as opposed to the elegant, tricky system in the original Deus Ex. When a RPG launcher takes up the same "space" in inventory as a handgun, something is off.

    3. Re:Finally! by Duradin · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think there's a way for you to enjoy modern inventory systems.

      Whenever you pick up an item, pause the game.
      Then start up a game of tetris, easy for small items, increase difficulty as the item size increases.
      Beat 99 levels in row. If you fail you do not have enough inventory space for the item.
      Unpause the game. If you completed 99 levels, add the item to your inventory. Otherwise leave the item behind.

      This way, the rest of us can actually play the game and you can still play inventory management.

    4. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't mind size differences, thats fine. But don't make me fumble through my bag for potions every few fights to put them back on my belt. If you want to limit my potion usage, give them a cumulative cooldown. Inventory management can be dificult without being a pain in the ass.

    5. Re:Finally! by NoobixCube · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've never been able to decide if I like a weight based inventory (like The Elder Scrolls) or a slot inventory (like Diablo) more. Both systems have their pros and cons, but I think a mix would be best. Sometimes really small things can be very heavy, while large things can be light. A slot inventory that gets dynamically adjusted based on the weight of things you are carrying would be good. Small heavy things would reduce the available slots, while large light things might give back half the space they take. It probably sounds a little half-baked, but I haven't fully worked out how I'd implement it yet, so it IS half-baked :P

      --
      Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    6. Re:Finally! by maglor_83 · · Score: 5, Informative

      See Baldur's Gate.
      You have a maximum number of slots, and a maximum weight. If you go a little over the weight, then you slow down. If you go a lot over, you can't move.

    7. Re:Finally! by calmofthestorm · · Score: 0

      I feel the same way. Why not just automate the monster killing system so that they drop bombs on the ground that when you touch them kill all monsters on screen, so they can focus more on the WoW-like cartoon graphics? I loved D1, D2 was so-so. D3 shows Blizzard going too far down a road I can't follow them.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    8. Re:Finally! by MikeBabcock · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As funny as that was, it annoys me when games allow you to carry phenomenal amounts of weight without considering the awesome difficulty of having 14 different massive hammers over your shoulder at once.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    9. Re:Finally! by Guruthegreat · · Score: 5, Funny

      Everyone knows you don't carry 14 different massive hammers at once, you carry 12 massive hammers and a magic box with 2 massive hammers inside it

      --
      Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
    10. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Baldur's Gate is a weight based system. I wouldn't really call it "slot inventory", if a scroll or a small gem takes the same spaces as full plate mail.

    11. Re:Finally! by nog_lorp · · Score: 1

      Slowness due to inventory is annoying as fuck though. I'd prefer like this: Size and Weight. You cannot pick up more than X size units of items, you cannot pick up more than X weight unites of items. No gray areas, no slow downs. And very large 'slot space' that is unrelated to the limits, so you can organize how you like.

    12. Re:Finally! by electricbern · · Score: 1

      You can always do like Leisure Suit Larry that folded a person sized soda cup into his pocket. Filled.

      --
      alias possession='chmod 666 satan && ls /dev > il && tail daemon.log'
    13. Re:Finally! by Negatyfus · · Score: 1

      It's a game. Why does this have to be realistic? If it were, you'd probably have a hard time carrying more than one plated armor suit at a time. Realistic wouldn't be practical, let alone fun.

    14. Re:Finally! by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Oh yah? Well in WOW you can carry 6 backpacks at once. I'm going to try that next time I go hiking.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    15. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, 'cause you're playing as a Wizard for the realism of it all.

    16. Re:Finally! by MAbans · · Score: 1

      Funny.

    17. Re:Finally! by immcintosh · · Score: 1

      Sure, that's fine for little boys and sissies! Real men will first locate a bag of holding, most often after completing a rousing game of sokoban. They will then attempt to find an altar, and convert it through sacrifice if of the incorrect alignment. Having accomplished that, they will dilute several potions using fountains, and with the water produced will pray over the previously located altar. Now, having holy water, they will dip their bag of holding to bless it. Having completed these simple steps, they may now carry 14 different massive hammers and the complete inventories of several dozen armored soldiers with little difficulty.

      P.S. There really needs to be a Nethackers Anonymous...

    18. Re:Finally! by Walkingshark · · Score: 1

      Hell, if it were real you'd have to stop and rest after every fight, eventually you wouldn't be able to even move much less swing your oversized weapon, and the first time you came within 10 paces of molten lava it would burn your face off, or at least kill you from heat exhaustion due to all your heavy armor/robes/whatever. Of course, if it was realistic there wouldn't be demons to kill, and you wouldn't be able to shoot magic fire out of your fucking hands either... Realism is boring. If I want realism I'll get some guns and move to Lebanon.

      --
      The world you experience is only a close approximation of reality.
    19. Re:Finally! by BigJClark · · Score: 1


      I have a massive hammer.

      --

      Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
    20. Re:Finally! by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      P.S. There really needs to be a Nethackers Anonymous...

      Here's how to join Nethackers Anonymous:

      telnet nethack.alt.org

      and also join #nethack on FreeNode.

    21. Re:Finally! by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      The comment I made wasn't about realism within our frame of reference, but realism within that of the game.

      If you came across an enemy with 14 hammers like your own and ten sets of armour and fifty potions, you'd be pissed off.

      The character you play in a game should be realistic to the context of the game in question or else you lose the suspension of disbelief.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    22. Re:Finally! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Playing tetris with your inventroy is tedious. If you really want a meaningful cost to carrying everything and the kitchen sink with you assign weights and let the character only carry so much weight around instead of making him fit random shapes into an arbitrary rectangle. The rectangle means you have to move stuff around to fit new stuff even though you have enough open squares scattered in the inventory, weight limits let you pick stuff up until you run completely out of capacity

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    23. Re:Finally! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Well, since those are spare hammers, not hammers you wield it's not really useful for random people to carry that many, especially when they don't have a job that would make them come across so many hammers (you collect them by travelling and killing lots of stuff, most NPCs don't kill as many things as you do).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    24. Re:Finally! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      How about assigning volume and mass to each item and you have a fixed capacity of each so you can safely solve your inventory juggling with a simplex algorithm.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    25. Re:Finally! by retchdog · · Score: 1

      It didn't stop people appreciating System Shock 2, a game where every weapon takes the same space, a full vertical strip (1x3). Armors/suits are 2x2, "potions" are 1x1 with stacking, and all other items are 1x1.

      Despite the "unrealism", inventory juggling is fairly well balanced in SS2. All weapons are the same so that when you change weapons, they can go into the other slot. As it is, the slots force you to make hard choices about what to bring along (bringing a hazmat suit and combat armor will cut into your overall carry capacity inconvenience) while not inconveniencing hot-swapping too much.

      You can "buy" a few more slots (1x3 at a time, up to 4x3) by either increasing strength, or spending (rare) perks.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    26. Re:Finally! by rcuhljr · · Score: 1

      This reminds me that I have a barbarian working on an ascension I haven't logged into in almost 3 months, probably cause he's in the middle of pudding farming.

    27. Re:Finally! by shivamib · · Score: 0

      you carry 12 massive hammers and a magic box with 2 massive hammers inside it

      It's a Horadrik Cube, insensitive clod!

  2. My reponse by Kingrames · · Score: 4, Funny

    Git offa ma lawn - ooh, shiny! *begins furiously looting*

    Damn you and your addictive games, Blizzard.

    --
    If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    1. Re:My reponse by Cornflake917 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's also one of the big changes they are putting in to Diablo 3. When you're in a multiplayer game, each item drops for a specific player, and only that player can see that item until they pick it up (and drop it). So no you don't have to loot furiously or out ninja-click your teammates to get shinyz any more.

      For those who think I'm talking out of my ass:

      http://blizzplanet.com/news/2537/

    2. Re:My reponse by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      Thank god.

      All I could think of when I read the summary was "Elf shoots food."

    3. Re:My reponse by nog_lorp · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      He's talking out his ass, that link is just a rickroll!

    4. Re:My reponse by Caboosian · · Score: 1

      So no you don't have to loot furiously

      You say that as if looting furiously was bad!

    5. Re:My reponse by Das+Modell · · Score: 0, Offtopic
  3. Metroidiablo by Captain+Spam · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Monsters drop health orbs on the ground when you kill them, instead of a potion system? So, in a way, what they've got now is Metroid applied to a dungeon crawl?

    (yes, there's a billion other games that do that, Metroid was just the first to come to mind)

    --
    Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
    1. Re:Metroidiablo by Millennium · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Not bad, but using Kingdom Hearts as your example would resonate better with the BAWWWWWers.

    2. Re:Metroidiablo by colmore · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Plentiful and common health potions that can heal the main character from near death to perfect health reliably and repeatably aren't the least bit realistic either.

      This changes health management in two ways:
      1 - health isn't tied to inventory
      2 - the graphic for "health item" looks different

      I hope nobody is complaining that this represents some grave cheapening of the game. It wasn't Fallout, where health items are rare, cost a fortune, and come with some of the side effects of actual drugs.

      Oh any word on if Fallout 3 is still going to be scarce on the health power ups? The demos have looked combat-y (which is fine, it's certainly the most interesting bit of a game, at least visually) but is the game such a heavy shooter that they're going to need to throw downside-free stimpacks at the player all the time?

      --
      In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    3. Re:Metroidiablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please stop bringing realism into discussions involving games. They have absolutely no part in them unless you're a fan of ultra-realism vehicle sims, which aren't games to begin with.

    4. Re:Metroidiablo by chill · · Score: 1

      America's Army was great and handled health nicely. Of course, games usually lasted no more than 5 or 6 minutes...

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    5. Re:Metroidiablo by Captain+Spam · · Score: 1

      I never said anything about realism. The implication was a relatively major change in the core gameplay and strategies.

      And to be perfectly honest, I don't think realism has much business in a game like Diablo, else you lose... well, the entire game. The fantasy races, the fantasy/demonic creatures, the magic, the setting...

      --
      Demanding constant attention will only lead to attention.
    6. Re:Metroidiablo by Kingrames · · Score: 1

      You had to use stimpacks?

      I quickloaded every time my character lost a hit point, and hoarded those things like solid gold.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    7. Re:Metroidiablo by Fozzyuw · · Score: 1

      Not bad, but using Kingdom Hearts as your example would resonate better with the BAWWWWWers.

      Didn't Xmen Legends or Marvel Ultimate Alliance do this as well? I seem to recall something like that, but I also seem to recall there being potions in at least one of those games.

      --
      "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
    8. Re:Metroidiablo by setagllib · · Score: 1

      The first that came to mind for me was Zelda, where you also get regular free hearts so you virtually never need to bring a potion. And this feature has been in EVERY Zelda since the very beginning, so it's hilarious watching these developers act so clueless when hyping up their "innovation".

      --
      Sam ty sig.
    9. Re:Metroidiablo by afidel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My problem is that it makes boss fights much tougher for marginal builds, with loads of health potions you didn't have to have a perfect build to take out a boss, you could widdle them down because you had a larger effective HP pool than they did. It cost you gold to build that larger pool, but it was doable. Btw an example of a marginal build I'm thinking of is a naked sorceress or dagger paladin both of which can be fun to play even if they are far from what the designers might have envisioned when designing encounters.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    10. Re:Metroidiablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If they were really clever, maybe they could make some item (like, say a belt) that let the player carry around extra orbs so they could use them later.

    11. Re:Metroidiablo by rkanodia · · Score: 1

      Good comparison, especially since those games are essentially Gauntlet Legends with new skins and RPG-lite elements, and Gauntlet Legends is essentially an arcade version of Diablo.

    12. Re:Metroidiablo by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 1

      It wasn't Fallout, where health items are rare, cost a fortune, and come with some of the side effects of actual drugs.

      Maybe FO wasn't this way, but in FO2, I ended the game with 40 super stims that healed tons of damage and then hurt you a little bit afterwards. That was more than enough stims to kill a person with the side-effects alone, and I don't know any drugs whose side effects include losing ten hit points. Not to mention that you could in one random encounter find the most powerful healing items in the game--which had no side effects--literally laying on the ground. I'm not going to say that healing items were as common in FO2 as they were in D2, but I never really had to ration my healing items the way I rationed my bullets.

      I would be very amused if this turned out to be a prelude to an attempt to do away with inventory management as it's known in Diablo right now.

    13. Re:Metroidiablo by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      I'll never forget beating Diablo 1 by carrying all mana potions instead of health potions and then using mana shield.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    14. Re:Metroidiablo by zarthrag · · Score: 1

      Ah the mana shield. My sorcerer drank mana as if it was liquid crack. My *entire* family played this game together for recreation every weekend - I think I had hit level 146 before 2 finally came out....sheesh - I can't believe I'm semi-excited about 3

      --
      Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
    15. Re:Metroidiablo by ildon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you're missing an important gameplay point. You actually have to KILL mobs to obtain health orbs while in combat. A lot of times in Diablo/Diablo 2 on the harder difficulties (and especially hardcore in D2) often times when faces with extremely dangerous packs of enemies or difficult bosses, you'd have to town portal REPEATEDLY to restock on potions, before a single monster had fallen. Admittedly, this was pretty bad game design. It pulled you out of the action and felt "cheesy".

      The obvious answer is to tune difficult groups of monsters and bosses with this in mind (or provide alternate sources of healing through things like abilities, life leech items, or secondary mechanics to drop health orbs BEFORE an enemy or set of enemies dies), but it's still a considerably bigger change than simply "unlinking healing items from inventory".

      Overall, I do think it's a positive change, I just think you're oversimplifying it.

    16. Re:Metroidiablo by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      Nah basically its Hexen, except at least Hexen had the 10pt health potions that topped up your health (can't carry). AND the more rare carryable flasks +25 Health IIRC.
      The more I hear about Diablo, the less interested I am. Hopefully Sacred 2 isn't a disappointment.

    17. Re:Metroidiablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't cut out the downsides, it might start feeling like Doom, in the sense that you're often down to no health and have to be extremely careful about everything for the next little bit.

      I always liked that. It's an attention focussing mechanism that really brings the gritty experience to the player.

    18. Re:Metroidiablo by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      It's Marvel Ultimate Alliance that does it, X-Men Legends (at least the first one that I own) still uses potions. If memory serves me correctly, the PS3 Untold Legends game also does it that way. As I've said before, Blizzard is playing catchup to all those PS2 Diablo clones. That's what happens when you slack off, dev wise, for years. WoW is not an excuse, Square-Enix can do an MMORPG and STILL develop hordes of games. Of course, being a console dev house, Square-Enix actually works hard rather than being to lazy to port their own game to the PS2. Yeah Blizzard, you're a bunch of lazy stupid bums for not porting D2 to the PS2, and now SOE and Snowblind have leapfrogged you.

    19. Re:Metroidiablo by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Na, they play more like Diablo than Gauntlet Legends. But both Diablo and Gauntlet-foo have Rogue-likes in their ancestry, so they're closely related cousins.

    20. Re:Metroidiablo by shadowrat · · Score: 1

      But you are critiquing it as if it were Diablo II without health potions. It's diablo 3 and they are trying to tune it to this health orb system.

      I doubt orbs are the only source of health either. d1 & 2 both had weapon attributes that allowed you to leach life. It just wasn't that sought after because you could load up on potions.

    21. Re:Metroidiablo by CronoCloud · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is no level 146 in Diablo, the maximum character level is 50.

    22. Re:Metroidiablo by afidel · · Score: 1

      Oh I know about life and mana leech, getting a lvl 99 HC Amazon wouldn't really be possible without it =) But almost all magic character builds lack physical damage which means no leech.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    23. Re:Metroidiablo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's hilarious watching these developers act so clueless when hyping up their "innovation".

      You're acting as if the Diablo 3 devs are claiming to have invented the "enemies dropping health boosts" concept. They are not, nor is any such thing implied by them anywhere at any time. So either you're either lying or you can't read. Which is it? Those are your only possible choices, and any other answer will merely confirm that it's "both".

    24. Re:Metroidiablo by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      At very least Necromancers were HEAVY on the leeching.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    25. Re:Metroidiablo by zarthrag · · Score: 1

      It was 10 years ago! My brain probably increased it an order of magnitude for dramatic effect - But I do remember that there weren't any more spells - and that my stats (all of them) were maxed - getting more strength/magic could be done w/items only.

      --
      Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
  4. Strategy in MY D3? by sabre3999 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It sounds as if they wanted to bring in a strategy angle for the PvE element with this new installment... I remember not needing much strategy at all in Diablo 2, just hack and slash and power through everything. Also, if I'm understanding TFA correctly, there are no potions (But as you get further and further into the game, you start having to go, 'Okay now I've really got to use this ground stomp thing to stun some monsters and get some distance from them to recover.') They also imply the monsters will be weaker to balance this out however, so it'll be interesting indeed to see how everything turns out.

    Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3... Blizzard is going to make some cash off me when they finally hit the market.

    1. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by omfglearntoplay · · Score: 1

      Sounds better to me at a glance, although it's been a while since i played the old ones. If it encourages more tactics, then I'm all for it.

    2. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by Tragedy4u · · Score: 1

      You didn't need much strategy with the hand-to-hand fighter types...the spell casters however sometimes required some tactics to take down large groups or bosses alone due to being physically frail.

    3. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by sabre3999 · · Score: 1

      You have a good point. I know that an increase in the need for strategy and tactics with the direct types will increase the fun factor for me, but if you now need strategy for them... well, you'd probably need even more for the magic slinging classes.

    4. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by lgw · · Score: 1

      A good, proerply gear spellcaster in D2 would pretty much instantly kill everything on the screen at all times, except for the things that instantly killed you. Not much stratgy there. Of course, I never saw the appeal of a game where the only real gameplay was to kill the same boss over and over for 80 straight hours to get a couple of good items, but no one can deny that it was in fact appealing to a great many people.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It sounds as if they wanted to bring in a strategy angle for the PvE element with this new installment... I remember not needing much strategy at all in Diablo 2, just hack and slash and power through everything. Also, if I'm understanding TFA correctly, there are no potions

      You're forgetting part of the "strategy". It was hack and slash and oh noes my health is low pop a big rejuvie potion. Don't attempt Diablo without at least 16 of em!

      I'm quite glad about this change. Like the quote from the summary, " We don't have to kill you to challenge you." Since any time you got in any health trouble you could heal to full, almost nothing was a danger unless you couldn't kill it before you ran out of potions. Oh, but then, THEN, you run across the immensely feared and stupidly cheesy Multiple Shot Lightning Enchant Fire Enchant, and you, you idiot, were a Zeal Paladin. You click them once and go SPLAT!

      That was "challenge" in D2. A ridiculously cheap insta-death. That's why I'd never play a Hardcore character. I mean I love Nethack, and sure it can hand you some quick nasty deaths, but they rarely if ever feel -cheap-. Pretty much every death in D2 felt that way.

      So if the challenge in the new system is "oh noes my health is low can I find/reach a health orb in time", that's a hundred times better to me than "oh noes the boss can one-shot me".

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    6. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by DrMrLordX · · Score: 1

      Not sure if you're thinking of the old "tweaker" FO sorceresses, but they broke most of the "kill everything all the time" strategies with various patches that introduced widespread elemental immunities in Hell mode (and Nightmare to a lesser extent) and added casting delays to prevent Sorceresses from being able to spam their most powerful spells (FO, Blizzard, Meteor, Firewall) without regard for actual aiming or anything else of the sort. Given that you can't break cold immunity with Cold Mastery alone (you need a Lower Resist wand or a helpful Necro), you can't rely on one spell (FO) killing everything anymore, at least not with any degree of efficiency.

      You might be able to do it with a cold sorc using a Lower Resist wand, but I have no idea if Cold Mastery works on cold immunes once Lower Resist is in effect. If it does then you'd have to use 2-3 spells (probably a combination of FO and Ice Blast or Glacier Spike) and some Teleportation to stay out of trouble (there are some enemies in Act V that are immune to being frozen/chilled). If Lower Resist doesn't make Cold Mastery effective against cold immunes, then you may as well abandon the Cold tree altogether and play a Charged Bolt/Firewall sorceress or something lame like that and exploit a Lower Resist wand for all that it's worth. You aren't going to do much better than that if you really want to play sloppy and dump mana all over the place (have fun when they hit you with Bloodmana too, urgh).

    7. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by lgw · · Score: 1

      My friend who was into D2 deeply had a sorc with 2 or 3 damage types, each of which could pretty much insta-kill the screen if the monsters weren't immune to that type of damage. There was actually one heck of a lot of strategy that went into deriving the build/gear to make that possible, but the gameplay was deadly dull. He really would do runs against some boss for 80 hours of gameplay to get some piece of gear he needed to make it all work.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    8. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      My experience in D2 with a variety of Sorcersses that were usually extremely good in 2 of the 3 trees... 30 skill in chain lightning + 30 skill in frozen orb for example plus a bunch of auxilliary skills / items for mana regen, resistances, etc.

      I still found the end of nightmare / hell very hard. Sure I could kill everything on a regular screen almost instantly, and even most bosses were a cakewalk. But the big level bosses and their minions were hard (Duriel, Mephisto, Diablo, and Baal) -- but while hard, I knew they were coming and was appropriately prepared and cautious.

      I usually died to the random unique bosses ... particularly those that spawned with that reflective lightinging/triple damage ability... they'd be in a crowd of crap...I just be wandering around minding my own business, and I'd fill the screen with death... only to have wave upon wave of that reflected crap come back at unsuspecting old me, and kill me dead in nothing flat.

      It was one of the reasons 'hill runs' were so popular, there were no random bosses, just the one level boss (who was always the same, in the same place, and a cakewalk).

    9. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by duckInferno · · Score: 1

      Sounds like he was having fun, then. What's the problem?

      --
      Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, watch it -- I'm huge!
    10. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by lgw · · Score: 1

      I don't believe that I suggested that there was a problem, only that I did not see the appeal.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    11. Re:Strategy in MY D3? by king-manic · · Score: 1

      The fear of M-S-L is greatly reduced now with absorb gear. M-S-L won't even tickle a absorbed oriented zealer.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  5. Marvel Ultimate Alliance by urikkiru · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is the exact system used in Marvel Ultimate Alliance. Which was also an evolution from a potion system in X-Men Legends 2. That said, it's actually a very *good* system. I approve.

  6. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    How is that going to affect boss matches? Unless the boss monster has a load of minions, that could be quite a challenge!

    1. Re:Well... by 4D6963 · · Score: 5, Funny

      How is that going to affect boss matches? Unless the boss monster has a load of minions, that could be quite a challenge!

      Indeed, I only hope the monsters drop these "health orbs" through specific orifices. Would give a new sense to beating the proverbial shit out of them. Mostly if that shit heals your wounds.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    2. Re:Well... by Fozzyuw · · Score: 1

      How is that going to affect boss matches? Unless the boss monster has a load of minions, that could be quite a challenge!

      Usually destroying local boxes or other various destructible environments released orbs as well in other games. Perhaps this will be similar?

      --
      "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
  7. What about bosses? by jevring · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, if there's an extended fight like, say, DIABLO...
    A fight which you might not survive with just the health and mana you have in your orbs, what do you do? If you can't chug potions, you have to, in effect, execute the monster perfectly to even survive. I think that the orb system is better when you're hacking and slashing your way through several monsters that actually die, but when you encounter monsters that are not easy to get down, then you might need a heal or two. I certainly prefer chugging potions to relying on support classes (like priests, druids, paladins and shamans in wow) to heal you.

    --
    Move sig!
    1. Re:What about bosses? by ivan256 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Who's to say an "orb" doesn't fall out if you hit the boss hard enough? It doesn't necessarily have to die....

    2. Re:What about bosses? by jevring · · Score: 1

      That is a valid point, and if they do it like that, it can solve some problems. However, currently, they have only stated that monsters drops these orbs when they die, and not all monsters drop orbs. It is completely possible, however, just like you say, that bosses behave that way, but I don't know.
      I'm sure they can solve the problem I described in many creative ways. I just hope that they actually address it.

      --
      Move sig!
    3. Re:What about bosses? by mpathetiq · · Score: 1

      Another possible option would to have a few minor henchmen around that you could defeat for orbs.

    4. Re:What about bosses? by dmatos · · Score: 1

      Perhaps there will be no more "I'm a big bad lonely boss" fights. They could have the big boss periodically spawn little monsters to die and supply you with your precious health orbs. You would then have to use some strategy - do I keep wailing on this guy, or go refill my health?

      --

      It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
      --Scott Adams
    5. Re:What about bosses? by Bieeanda · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That was my first thought. Every so often, the boss could do something that affects the environment, or spawns a handful of minions, that you can manipulate to replenish your health supply. The trick becomes surviving long enough for those events to occur and repeat, rather than training yourself to hit your belt keys at the most advantageous time.

    6. Re:What about bosses? by jevring · · Score: 1

      Both possible too. Or there might be a room before the boss with the aforementioned henchmen, and you could have a charging system that would let you keep 3-5 orbs stacked, ready to drop when you lost enough health. in a sense, you would buffer up your health, so that you would go in to battle with more than you already have. This could even be a special boss-only feature. Perhaps triggered by using some kind of shrine. The possibilities are endless, and I hope they will be addressed.

      --
      Move sig!
    7. Re:What about bosses? by amuro98 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Someone mentioned Marvel: Ultimate Alliance, which I think is a very good comparison.

      While defeating enemies in the game would cause them to drop health and mana orbs, bosses would drop them on a regular basis while you beat on them (I think ever 25% of so.) So, you didn't have to be able to defeat the boss without dying - just able to knock 25% of his health off so you could heal up enough to keep on beating on him.

      This could work for DiabloIII as well, though I can remember some fights where I wasn't even able to put a dent in the stupid boss the first few times I faced it, dying a good 4 or 5 times before I figured out the strategy for my combination of boss and character class.

    8. Re:What about bosses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well this could be solved easily by having the boss droping orbs at some health interval or something like that. Or maybe every classes could have a self healing ability that could be limited to one use every X minutes or Y times per "level".

      I'm pretty sure they will have that figured out.

      I just hope the : "The game is made to be played with friends" part wont make the game unplayable in single-player.

    9. Re:What about bosses? by cube135 · · Score: 1

      Or pieces fall of the boss that spawn orbs.

    10. Re:What about bosses? by SwordsmanLuke · · Score: 1

      ...IANA Game Developer, but I'm willing to bet they've thought of that.

      --
      Any plan which depends on a fundamental change in human behavior is doomed from the start.
    11. Re:What about bosses? by shypht · · Score: 1

      Option 1: Every X% of the boss monsters HP that gets chopped off, he spews out orbs Option 2: Every X seconds, the boss spews out orbs Option 3: Boss monsters spawn additional monsters (generally easy to kill ones) I'm sure that there are more options, but those are the first three that come to mind. God of War had similar to option #1 for longer fights.

    12. Re:What about bosses? by CrashPoint · · Score: 1

      I'd be surprised if they didn't continue to have the life-stealing ability for weapons in D3. A D2 build with enough life-stealing rarely needs potions even in extended boss fights.

    13. Re:What about bosses? by tknd · · Score: 5, Funny

      I propose a much better system where the player dies after one hit or tap from a monster. And if the player wishes to be able to survive a second hit, he must either find the nearest mushroom or orange flower hidden away in some box disguised like all the others.

    14. Re:What about bosses? by phyy-nx · · Score: 1

      Just like any boss from the Metroid Prime series, especially destroying its projectiles. Tried and true.

    15. Re:What about bosses? by Creepy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Even the gameplay movie they have up on their site (from E3) only shows monsters dropping orbs when they die. The way it currently looks, bosses have certain attacks and you need to run around a lot and avoid them and pick up orbs dropped by previously beaten monsters.

      Back to listening to "Town" and "Tristram" by Matt Uelmen on B-net mp3 player - brings back memories (always did like the Bauhaus [specifically the end of Mask] sound of those tracks with the 12 string - all the new stuff released so far for Diablo 3 sounds more Dead Can Dance, but some of the earlier tracks also sounded like DCD).

    16. Re:What about bosses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      One would think that a smart boss would then realize it is better to not spawn countless minions that just feed you health and mana.

      "Oh, hey, I've got him on the ropes here, now I'll just spawn another 20 bats to go harass him and it should be done with...

      Wait a tick, are my guys dropping health for him, wtf? No wonder he managed to get all the way down here."

    17. Re:What about bosses? by ceswiedler · · Score: 1

      Now that you point it out, it does seem obvious that the makers of Warcraft, Starcraft, Diablo, and WoW will be unable to apply rudimentary game balance to their new mechanic. I'm sure they'll just take all of the monsters from Diablo 2 and make you fight them with these newfangled orbs. Really, when has Blizzard ever released a well-balanced game?

      Please let me know when your next game is coming out, I'm sure it will be lots of fun.

    18. Re:What about bosses? by DeadDecoy · · Score: 1

      That reminds me of trying to fight the secret level of mephisto, baal, and diablo at the same time. Each boss could pretty much two-shot you unless you had some serious life-leech gear. Rejuv potions kinda helped in case they got off a lucky shot and you missed your life-leech. It would have been nice if potions, while not necessary, were available for hard fights. Sure, managing potions in normal fights was kinda annoying, but potions added a sense of urgency and strategy when fighting a boss that was a couple levels beyond your class. If they have it shit out potions mid fight, that might ruin the edge of the fight. In other words, the outcome of the fight is based more on the randomness of the computer than it is on me.

    19. Re:What about bosses? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      So, if there's an extended fight like, say, DIABLO... A fight which you might not survive with just the health and mana you have in your orbs, what do you do?

      That's easy enough, bosses drop on occassion. Be it pure random chance (each X HP of damage you do gives a 10% chance of a drop) or number of hits, or straight damage correlation, or whatever.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    20. Re:What about bosses? by rukcus · · Score: 1

      The first thing I thought about when I read this was God of War. Health/mana orbs fall from killed baddies, but they also fell off bosses during the middle of the fight (after a small milestone, such as slaying a Hydra's head).

      Devil May Cry also used this system.

    21. Re:What about bosses? by Bieeanda · · Score: 2, Funny
      Maybe the boss can't help it.

      "All right, I'm steamed now! I'll just rise up onto my hind legs and swing my elephant tenderizer up over my head, so I can spl--"

      "Aw, shit! I just ruptured the squishy minion pipe! It's fuckin' raining health in here now!"

    22. Re:What about bosses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was my first thought. Every so often, the boss could do something that affects the environment, or spawns a handful of minions, that you can manipulate to replenish your health supply.

      You mean, just like Zelda?

    23. Re:What about bosses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah you can bet that's how scripted boss fights will work. :)

    24. Re:What about bosses? by Tsoat · · Score: 1

      Well even if it doesn't then it makes the game that much more challenging, I didn't really like the whole chugging potions aspect of diablo. I mean come on my sorc isn't some sorority girl trying to get wasted at some bar. She's master of at least 3 elements! She shouldn't have to resort to her college days...

    25. Re:What about bosses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why every boss will probably have annoying distracting little bitch-ass lackeys that you have to fight at the same time, that drop health orbs and respawn every time you kill them.

    26. Re:What about bosses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Metroid did something similar. Bosses would fire projectiles that could be one shot and had an above average drop rate for health and missiles.

    27. Re:What about bosses? by apoc06 · · Score: 1

      it amazes me how half of the comments here are about players using sorceress builds.

      [disclaimer: i was paladin, then switched over to a fire sorc]

    28. Re:What about bosses? by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

      Darkwatch is an FPS that uses a similar system. When you get low on health, you have to stop shooting the big enemies to pop a few skeletons and replenish your health with their blood clouds, which also refill your vampire powers. It works well.

      Whatever system they use, I think Blizzard, of all companies, can be trusted to balance the game and shape it to -usually remarkably- work.

  8. "new" ??? by Tom · · Score: 1, Insightful

    to a new scheme in which monsters drop health orbs on the ground that refill your health when you touch them.

    What exactly is new about that? I've played a hundred or so games that used that system, many of them 10 or 20 years old (you know, back when action games didn't have an inventory).

    There's nothing new in Diabolo, not in 3, not in 2, not in the first one. It's an excellent and fun implementation of very old game concepts, but I've yet to see anything in it that wasn't done before.

    So please, I know this is /., but try to get the facts right every now and then. They changed the system to a different one. Nothing new about it.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:"new" ??? by idlemind · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, it's new system for Diablo. It's not like they are claiming they invented it.

    2. Re:"new" ??? by jayhawk88 · · Score: 1

      It's new to the Diablo franchise, perhaps this is what the author meant. Potions, after all, have been a staple of the past two games.

    3. Re:"new" ??? by darkhitman · · Score: 2, Funny

      I know this is /., but try and be less anal about vocabulary choice. If I say I'm switching to a 'new' email service, that doesn't mean that email service necessarily just popped into existence. It could just mean that I haven't used it before.

      --
      Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
    4. Re:"new" ??? by Dr.Boje · · Score: 1

      It's new for the Diablo series. I know this is /., but try to understand the context in which phrases like that are placed, rather than rant about something silly like that.

    5. Re:"new" ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know it's popular to dis the summary, but when step one of your criticism requires you to misinterpret what was said in a fantastically retarded way, then you fail.

    6. Re:"new" ??? by brkello · · Score: 1

      At first, your post made me a little mad since you are implying that the article said something that it didn't. But then I noticed your low UID number and figured you are probably really old by now and didn't get your nap in. It's ok Grampy Tom. We all know Diablo 3 isn't innovating when it drops health orbs!

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    7. Re:"new" ??? by ildon · · Score: 1

      I know this is /., but try

      So did you just post twice on different accounts, or is this a new slashdot meme? (Look at the post directly above yours.)

    8. Re:"new" ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know this is /., but try to act like you have two braincells to rub together.

  9. games and "health" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    in the early 80s with tabletop games, "Hit Points" made a lot of sense. slash, you lose 20 hi point. erase erase erase. "I drink my potion of extra healing" roll 3d8.

    Today, when you have ridiculously powerful personal computers running massive 3D simulations with thousands of concurrent interacting users - you'd think the game industry could innovate just a little bit around the idea of character "health". There are so many ways you could make these MMO games more intersting and fun by making the simulation of the character more like a real being... but somehow we have this near-ubiquitous meme that the characters in games have a single, one-dimentional, magically refreshable integer that rules the survival of the character.

    Instead, we get "item creation" ooohhhh. Fun!

    1. Re:games and "health" by VeNoM0619 · · Score: 2, Funny

      So... what is your proposal then? A health and hunger bar?

      --
      Disclaimer: I am not god.
      We may not be created equal
      But we can be treated equal.
    2. Re:games and "health" by FrostDust · · Score: 1

      It's far from impossible to implement, I just think that most players wouldn't be interested. I mean, mech games from over a decade ago have had individual component damage, so that a lot of hits to your unit's arm would render it unusable/destroyed, but you'd still be able to fight. However, most players don't want to worry about stuff like trying to hide their character's vulnerable side, or using specific healing items for each type of damage they incur. Metal Gear Solid 3 featured this, to a point, wherein there was a specific sequence of items used depending on the injury (bullet wound vs broken bone, etc.) but it felt more like a minigame they tacked on, than a tactically implemented system. I'm pretty sure many players, myself included, would enjoy a damage system that mapped hits to the exact area where weapons make contact, and would inflect realistic injuries. Armor would then have to be judged based upon the areas of the body it covered, and the materials it consisted of, instead of comparing items for which one has a higher bonus to defense. Many more players, however, seem to not want to worry about micromanaging their character's physiology, and prefer the system of "Use a healing potion/spell when my health gets down to x%."

    3. Re:games and "health" by Deathdonut · · Score: 1

      I'm sure other games have done it, but Fallout 2 comes to mind as one that included full effects from targetting/hitting specific body parts. I'll be curious to see if Fallout 3 goes in the same direction.

    4. Re:games and "health" by Dr.Boje · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think a lot of that stems from the desire to keep the focus on bashing monsters' brains in. In tabletop games, you have all the time in the world to ponder your next move. In a game like Diablo, you have to act quickly or become "Ahh... Fresh meat!". Although I wouldn't mind a little more complexity to the way a character's health is calculated, I would be disappointed and perhaps a little agitated if it had a negative impact on my time spent killing things.

      Could it be a little more realistic? Yes. Do I want it to be? No. In a real-time video game, trying to make gameplay elements too realistic can destroy the fun of the game, and that's NO GOOD! On the other hand, in a turn-based strategy game, more realistic gameplay elements can enhance the fun of the game. All in all, I think we can expect another mind-blowing, more-addictive-than-crack, FUN masterpiece from the brains at Blizzard and I can't wait.

    5. Re:games and "health" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The reason we stick with that "one-dimensional" indicator is probably that it's simple and flexible. There's only so much data you can keep in mind when you're playing a quick-paced, reflex-based game like Diablo; a more complex health system would be more likely to bog things down than to make the game more fun.

    6. Re:games and "health" by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Today, when you have ridiculously powerful personal computers running massive 3D simulations with thousands of concurrent interacting users - you'd think the game industry could innovate just a little bit around the idea of character "health".

      Amen!

      Back in the day there was a game (well a game/screensaver) called "Lunatic Fringe". It was sort of like asteroids, but instead of a health bar for your ship, you had several health bars. On was for your guns, one for your engine, one for your turning jets, one for your long range radar, etc. If you were shot or ran into an asteroid you took damage to one or more of them and those parts of the ship began to malfunction. If your guns were slightly damaged they might fail to fire one time in ten. If they were severely damaged they might only fire one time in ten. If your turning jets were damaged you sometimes you could turn the ship and sometimes you couldn't or it would turn the wrong way. The gameplay was absolutely awesome!!! Ever since I've been looking for a game that incorporated this same gameplay element.

      For a new Diablo style game you could start moving more slowly and erratically staggering. Your spells could fail. Your attacks could go in the wrong direction, hitting no one or the wrong person, maybe even allies. Your blocks with your shield could become less frequent or stop as an arm was disabled. Your vision could blur or become jumpy.

      Just count me as one very strong vote in favor of your idea.

    7. Re:games and "health" by Markspark · · Score: 1

      fallout 2 had this, very you could get hurt in different parts, affecting you in different ways, and the same went for the enemies, hope for some of those goodies in fallout 3 also.

      it's going to be a good game year, and a bad school year..

      --
      i find your lack of faith in science disturbing!
    8. Re:games and "health" by TriezGamer · · Score: 1

      If you don't mind the rogue-like style of interface (or gameplay), perhaps you should consider Dwarf Fortress?

      Free and constantly under development. It's a bit rough around the edges, but it's a great game with a fun community -- and the scope of the project is both immense, and slowly taking real shape.

      http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/

      This game exemplifies the problems and advantages of such a system incredibly well.

      It has two modes --

      First: a Civ mode called Fortress Mode where you try to survive in an environment of your choosing with a starting crew of 7 dwarves

      Second: Adventure mode where you play a single entity in the world.

      In both modes, every single entity tracks damage to individual body parts, and each part is rated on a scale ranging from healthy to completely missing, affecting every aspect of the life of the character. After one of my cats attacked an infiltrating kobold, it lost an eye and a leg, as well as suffering major head injuries. It spent the rest of it's life wandering aimlessly in my fortress and passing out randomly from the trauma until a goblin killed it during a siege.

    9. Re:games and "health" by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Sounds interesting I'll check it out. I lost a good 6 months of my life to Rogue and Angband back in the day. Oh well, here we go again.

    10. Re:games and "health" by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Star Wars Galaxies handled damage in a different way. Characters had three different pools which could be damaged Body, Action and Mind. If any one pool dropped to zero or lower your character would be KO'd or possibly killed.

      Attacks where randomly assigned as hitting your Torso, Legs, Feet, Arms, Hands, of Head. A hit to your torso reduced your Body pool primarily. A head hit affected your mind pool mostly. Hands and feet hits damaged your Action pool and I think legs and arms affected action and body. There were special attacks that you could learn that would let you specifically target and hit various areas. But normally an attack would be randomly assigned to any one of those areas with varying probabilities,Torso hits being the most common and head hits being the least likely.

      There was a huge variety of armor types available in the game each with individual stats for protection against different types of damage, the best of which was very cumbersome to wear. The Majority of players had a far smaller mind pool than anything else and so most people would take headshot type abilities. Which resulted in most people running around with the very best helmet they could find and a chest peice to match, maybe some leg armor and then just leave the rest exposed to try and keep their encumbrance down.

      There was a lot more too it but that's the gist of it. I found it an interesting system though really too complex to become widely popular.

    11. Re:games and "health" by Last_Available_Usern · · Score: 1

      As good of an idea this is, this wouldn't stand up in PvP. With deteriorating performance based on state, it becomes a contest of who gets the first shot. Any class with ranged or crowd control abilities would dominate every match-up.

    12. Re:games and "health" by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      As good of an idea this is, this wouldn't stand up in PvP. With deteriorating performance based on state, it becomes a contest of who gets the first shot. Any class with ranged or crowd control abilities would dominate every match-up.

      I disagree. It would change the balance of power but not break it. The ability to absorb more damage before having problems or to avoid taking damage (heavy armor) would balance well with the ability to hit from a distance (as it does now). It would actually allow for more variety as well, because some attacks may not be as damaging, but could make hitting easier (wider range or area of effect) partly mitigating the effects of damage.

  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. A heal or TWO!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ha, my friend and I have been playing it for a few weeks now out of nowhere, and I healed like every 10-30 seconds on Diablo. Don't ask me to describe my character, I don't know. Amazon with Gemmed bow...

  12. I Call Shennanigans! by Kneo24 · · Score: 1

    We can make a monster that affects your mobility, we can make a monster that has different kinds of attacks that are dangerous to you and that you actually have to avoid. And so it makes the combat a lot more interesting.

    There were monsters that had attacks that could affect your mobility in Diablo II. There were certain attacks you really had to avoid unless you were in the top tier of players in Diablo II. It doesn't sound any different to the person who didn't try to pimp out their toon to the max so they could easily walk all over everything. And honestly, not everyone could, not with how the games economy was so horribly screwed over by the botters.

    1. Re:I Call Shennanigans! by Chelloveck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "We don't have to kill you to challenge you.

      Really? You mean now there's a goal other than fighting until either you or the bad guys are dead?

      We can make a monster that affects your mobility

      To make you go slower so it can kill you easier.

      we can make a monster that has different kinds of attacks that are dangerous to you

      It can kill you by hitting you, by zapping you, by freezing you, by burning you...

      and that you actually have to avoid.

      Or you'll be killed.

      And so it makes the combat a lot more interesting."

      I may be dense, but it sounds to me like it still boils down to, "the challenge is to avoid being killed".

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    2. Re:I Call Shennanigans! by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Informative

      Really? You mean now there's a goal other than fighting until either you or the bad guys are dead?

      To make you go slower so it can kill you easier.

      It can kill you by hitting you, by zapping you, by freezing you, by burning you...

      Er, no, I don't think you get what they mean. They don't mean "We don't have to hurt you through successive attacks in such a manner that you will eventually be slain unless you take action in order to challenge you." They mean kill, like a killing blow, as in who cares if you have full health you die right now.

      In D2, because you could pop a Rejuvenation potion that instantly healed you to full whenever you wanted, most of the time attacks that merely hurt you by hitting you, zapping you, freezing you, burning you, were all no big deal. The only attacks that were ever really dangerous at all were those few that would either kill you in one shot, or would do so much damage so rapidly that you'd have to burn through your entire inventory of potions to survive for more than a second or two. Diablo's Lightning Hose, random Multiple Shot+Fire+Lightning enchanted mini-bosses, the necromancer bosses' Corpse Explosion, Duriel's charge if you weren't a heavy armor class... and well not really a whole lot else.

      It was a combination of immensely easy on the one hand, and incredibly cheap on the other, with insanely fast transitions that would leave you saying "WTF just killed me?!"

      The new system sounds like a huge improvement. By having orbs drop from enemies, this means they can control the pace of health recovery, and it means that slow hurting attacks can be dangerous if you can't get enough health orbs to recover in time. By not letting the player have access to basically 16x their health pool (or more), it eliminates the need for insta-kill abilities just to make the player sweat.

      If D3 is able to be challenging without being cheap, maybe I'll actually try playing Hardcore (die once, dead forever, like in the Rogue-likes Diablo inherits from).

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    3. Re:I Call Shennanigans! by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      The problem is, the game designer's control of the pace of healing means they also control how you can create your character.

      If you create one with less health or using a different strategy than the devs had in mind, you may be permanently stuck by way of not being able to kill things fast enough to get the orbs.

      In D2 you could create some pretty ridiculous builds (Like a dagger paladin) and actually have them be relatively successful as long as you were willing to suck potions down a lot.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    4. Re:I Call Shennanigans! by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Funny

      In D2 you could create some pretty ridiculous builds (Like a dagger paladin) and actually have them be relatively successful as long as you were willing to suck

      I'll just cut off the quote there and say that as long as there are a wide variety of builds that are viable (which there were in D2 not counting absurdities), then I don't think this is a big problem.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    5. Re:I Call Shennanigans! by Mursk · · Score: 1

      In the first Diablo, there were some zombie-like enemies that could (IIRC) permanently reduce your max HP. That sucked. I hope they don't do anything like that again...

      --
      "This thing does science so hard, you say, 'I've never seen that much science.'" -Sam
    6. Re:I Call Shennanigans! by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Black death zombies, and yes, it was permanent.

    7. Re:I Call Shennanigans! by shivamib · · Score: 0

      insanely fast transitions that would leave you saying "WTF just killed me?!"

      While hammering something like "TP plz?!?!" Diablo's annoying lightnings were usually instakill on hell.

  13. Behold the Disneymancer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So... basically it's going to play like Kingdom Hearts *shudder*

    1. Re:Behold the Disneymancer! by Valdrax · · Score: 1

      You say that like the gameplay was the bad part of Kingdom Hearts.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    2. Re:Behold the Disneymancer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was no "bad part". It was all bad.

  14. Well I'm pleased by thermian · · Score: 1

    I really liked the Diablo series, but I have got to say that I got utterly sick of endless button mashing to apply potions.

    It never really added anything to the game in my opinion, in fact I felt it was the worst part of it. I went on to play the dungeon siege games, and there I deliberately avoided using health potions, simply so I wouldn't have that button mashing experience again. I died a lot, but its more interesting if you have to retreat rather then apply an inventory full of potions just to stay alive.

    --
    A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
  15. My mature, well thought out response by Alzheimers · · Score: 5, Funny

    click...click click click click click ooh shiney clickclick click click click click click click click click...

  16. Nic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that you Nic?

    ~one of the other two people in montana

    1. Re:Nic? by JoshRosenbaum · · Score: 1

      I think there are a lot more people from Montana on slashdot than you know. We have nothing better to do! :P I hail from Columbia Falls, MT. I'm close enough that I can find out the real identity of the Anonymous Coward grandparent post by driving 15 minutes to Safeway. :P (If I didn't want to make a call. :P) Will I do it.. No. :P

  17. Potions are not completely removed. by teko_teko · · Score: 1

    Another Blizzard post (maybe in the D3 website's FAQ) says that potions still exist. They're not completely gone, but probably are more rare. It will also be nerfed with a cooldown, just like in WoW.

    IMO, this will make the game more interesting than just potion spamming. You actually will have to use some skills and strategies in order to play effectively.

  18. PhysRx Engine by argent · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's about time games took health seriously. I guess the Nintendo Wii is starting to have an effect on PCs as well as consoles.

  19. Well Just Great by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 1

    After having only played the Diablo demo, and missing Diablo II entirely, just when I am considering an actual Diablo purchase I get this. How in the hell am I gonna go through the whole game getting scads of potions and hoarding them for that really difficult encounter that never comes??? That's how I play RPGS, people, I gather potions and never use them!

    I guess Diablo 3=fail or something.

    1. Re:Well Just Great by thedrx · · Score: 1

      In Diablo 2, you mostly don't have to hoard potions, as the health and mana ones are dirt cheap -- eventually, it's possible to let go of the hoarder mindset.

      And then, you have the rejuvenation and full rejuvenation potions, which heal both health and mana, instantaneously, and which you cannot buy. I usually hoard tons of them 'for tough spots', which of course never come.

    2. Re:Well Just Great by bladesjester · · Score: 1

      And then, you have the rejuvenation and full rejuvenation potions, which heal both health and mana, instantaneously, and which you cannot buy. I usually hoard tons of them 'for tough spots', which of course never come.

      I hated when the one patch they released killed the ability to make rejuvenation potions from health and mana potions. Instead of being able to actually play and enjoy the game, I had to keep stalking places where I could find them instead until I had enough to cube together into full rejuv potions.

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
    3. Re:Well Just Great by thedrx · · Score: 1

      I hated when the one patch they released killed the ability to make rejuvenation potions from health and mana potions. Instead of being able to actually play and enjoy the game, I had to keep stalking places where I could find them instead until I had enough to cube together into full rejuv potions. You still can, IIRC, you have to include low quality gems now.

    4. Re:Well Just Great by bckrispi · · Score: 1

      You couldn't buy Rejuv potions. But you could brew your own using health potions, mana potions, and the Horadric Cube.

      --
      Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
  20. Town portal healing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I don't have health potions. Big deal... as long as they don't take my Tome of Town Portal. I can still get instant healing from Akara/Malah/whatever....

  21. I'm just here for the... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...nerd rage and I'm getting a kick out of it.

  22. So does this mean.... by SkOink · · Score: 1

    That TPing back to heal means we _finally_ get to waste Deckard Cain? :)

    --
    ---- I'll take you in a Hunt deathmatch any day.
    1. Re:So does this mean.... by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      Well, I enjoyed leaving him in the cage, defeating Baal first :D

      I gladly paid the identify costs for that.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  23. Orb monster drops? WTF no! by Tavor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We don't have to kill you to challenge you. We can make a monster that affects your mobility, we can make a monster that has different kinds of attacks that are dangerous to you and that you actually have to avoid. And so it makes the combat a lot more interesting."

    As opposed to what... ice-based attacks that freeze/slow? Poison that drains health? And what, avoiding those *&^*&^ Pit Lords and Abyss Knights at the River of Flame? Yeah, I don't see anything new here, ffs. As someone who likes fending off PVP'ers in the middle of fighting demons, I'd prefer being in control of my health, rather than being dependent on monster drops.
    Just having a system where potions in your inventory were dropped to your 'belt' hot-bar automatically would be an improvement far beyond the orb system.

    --
    Windows has detected an undetectable error.
    1. Re:Orb monster drops? WTF no! by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they could, you know, while they're borrowing ideas from the PS2 Diablo clones, they could borrow the concept of having a quick health/quick mana button. Which first appeared in the PSone port of Diablo!

  24. *Upcoming*? by MattW · · Score: 1

    For loose definitions of "upcoming".

  25. Marvel Alliance Diablo gameplay by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

    The problem with Marvel:Ulitmate Alliance and God of War is that everyone basically play the same character.

    With Diablo you have characters that wear more armor, have higher hit points, less likely to get hit due to physical distance, do less damage/second to a single target.

    Against a boss with 4000 hit points, a barbarian would be ok with getting a full health bar after dealing 1000 points of damage but a Sorc would need a recharge (health and mana) once every 500 points of damage delivered.

    Blizzard had better realize this.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  26. They wanted to eliminate Inventory Tetris? by IdeaMan · · Score: 1

    Bleh.... Just make it like Anarchy Online: Heal up differently depending on whether or not you are in combat. Combine that with potions that stack up into the thousands and you don't have to worry about moving them around. In AO they have two different sets of healing but I don't think that's necessary. Just make it so that it has a moderate initial bonus, then heals slowly but progressively gets faster unless you take damage.

    What they did will cause progress to slow down through an area with little health vs how much damage you take. I mean, are they going to remove the ability to go to town and heal up? Will the character not heal slowly over time?

    How are support classes supposed to pick up the healing mid-fight? Do they really want an Amazon that is being harried running into a big pack being tanked by a barb to try to heal up?

    I agree with you about the stupid instant death things. Those undead stygian ankle biters were a real pain in the neck. It's ok to have monsters that can kill you in one hit if you can prepare for it ahead of time by changing your equipment or tactics, but having 1-hit KOs on random mobs with the lighting set to 1/2 second in front of you is just ludicrous.

    --
    They ARE out to get you simply because They are in it for themselves and they don't care about you.
  27. Re:Marvel Alliance Diablo gameplay by ZorbaTHut · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure Blizzard is not clinically retarded.

    That said, you're also assuming that "a full health bar" is just as easy for both classes. If a Barbarian has a lot more raw HP, the orbs may not fill him up as much - sure, he can do 1000 damage without needing a pit stop, but after grabbing five orbs he can only do another 250 before he needs another. Meanwhile, the Sorceror, with Frost Armor and Freeze Monster, is able to stay away long enough that those same five orbs yields another 500 points of damage.

    Except even that's broken :D but, seriously, Blizzard made their reputation off good balance and polish. I don't think they'd make such an elementary mistake, especially such a mistake which would be caught trivially in playtests. And I can guarantee that Blizzard is already doing heavy balancing playtests because that's what Blizzard does.

    --
    Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
  28. Re:Marvel Alliance Diablo gameplay by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

    They need quite a bit of play testing, 5 characters and say 3 builds for each. I can name quite a bit of very good companies/games with at least one big flaw that playtesting should have gotten.

    E.g. - Bowazon vs. the boss Duriel. Small enclosed area with a very fast charge attack. Impossible when starting out because you are only level 8(?) (in the later two difficulties you better equipped/skilled/faster to handle him purely with a bow). You needed to put one point into Jab (the javalin tree) and wack away at him like that. You never use Jab again in the game. That should have been caught in playtesting.

    Another issue that should have been caught during playtesting; Amazon with Buriza and Guided Arrow. (Burizon)

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  29. Right, because realism is so important by patio11 · · Score: 1

    You should be encumbered when you carry 14 hammers. They should mess up your ability to stab the Demon Prince Ba'al in the forehead with the Swift Sword of the Whale which you've socketed with four soulstones. And while you're at it, shouldn't all that copious gore cause you to slip? Maybe you can sue Ba'al for not hiring an industrial engineer to spread sawdust on a floor which he could reasonably have expected to be covered in minion guts.

    Of course, if we're going for maximum realism, Ba'al probably has a better lawyer than you do.

    Seriously: if abstraction results in extra fun, abstract away. Diablo is a game about item collection, at its core. If you have any pretense of realism you have to start throwing away items as soon as you get new ones, which gets in the way of player strategizing and causes them to feel regret (Noooo this hammer would have gone perfect with the breastplate I left to rot in the dungeon!)

    1. Re:Right, because realism is so important by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      Perfect realism is silly, unless you're making a simulator of course. That's why abstractions exist. Removing choices however does not make games better, it often just makes them seem dull by the end.

      Personally, those moments of "do I give up this or that" are part of the fun of the game. Knowing you might be making the best decision, or that you might be making the next level difficult for yourself.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
  30. Fallout? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    For the record, health items weren't rare, expensive, tied to a limited inventory, or even dangerous or difficult to use in Fallout or Fallout 2. Fallout 1 had healing items on random encounters, on most guards, and on vendors (who, with a very modest Barter skill, would actually PAY THE PLAYER to take their entire stock), besides just being sprinkled liberally in bookcases and footlockers. Fallout 2 made them more plentiful in all of those locations; additionally, in Fallout 2, vendors regularly restocked, AND one possible party member could make a large number of extra Stimpaks and an infinite number of Super Stimpaks. Add in the ease of accruing phenomenal amounts of cash by selling tall stacks of expensive weapons dropped off weak enemies...Oh yeah, did I mention that ordinary Stimpaks were weightless (effectively took no inventory space), and that an infinite number of them could be guzzled in battle for the cost of going to inventory (4 or 2 AP)?

    As for the aforementioned side effects of Super Stimpaks, it's worth considering that the things usually didn't get used to heal friendlies. This was because they were slightly less common and rather more costly than Stimpaks, they had a weight (1 unit, still tiny), and a few minutes after doing their healing, they incurred a delayed damage effect. The uptake was that keeping track of just how many you'd used during a fight just wasn't worth the effort, especially given that it amounted to an unavoidable death once you had OD'ed on the things (hope you had an old save). This made them much more useful for assassinations, since using them counted as a non-threatening action to the AI and guaranteed a kill, no reloads or abuse necessary.

    The plentiful quantities of healing items made the First Aid and Doctor skills, as well as the Stamina statistic and a number of regen and health mod perks largely pointless outside of a few quest requirements and a couple quirky character builds (Jinxed builds, for example, need Doctor to repair injured body parts in the field, but such injuries are rare otherwise).

    The Fallout games did many innovative things and are well worthy of praise, but they pushed chemical/potion abuse just as hard as the Diablos (or the Elder Scrolls games, to touch on the Bethesda issue) did. More so, actually, since the only "buffs" in the game came from drugs, and many quests required certain baseline stats, which almost any character could reach by using the proper chemical regimen.

  31. I don't know how you can even play that game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bought that game for PS3. Huge mistake. I played for about 10 minutes the first session and couldn't stand it a few weeks later I forced myself to play for another 30 minutes and was just amazed that it was such an incredibly terrible game compared to Xmen Legends 2

  32. Blizzard borrowing yet more ideas from PS2 games by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

    Let's see, they have ripple water from Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance. Check
    Health orbs from Marvel Ultimate Alliance. check
    Art direction and environments that look like they popped out of those Snowblind engine games, BG:DA, Champions of Norrath, etc. Check.
    Doesn't look that much different from a PS2 game? Check.

    It's about time Blizzard learned something from console devs, considering they once were console devs themselves. However, it's a bit late in coming and rather obvious that something like this happened:

    Blizdev1: Hey let's finally get around to getting off our lazy asses and doing D3.
    Blizdev2: Okay, but lets look at our competition first.
    Blizdev3: I hear the PS2 has a lot of Diablo clones, why don't we look at those in addition to all the PC clones.
    Blizdevs get PS2.
    Blizdevs in unison: What the? Ripple water? Rotatable AND zoomable camera? Look at those spells and magic effects. Look at those environments! These games look better than Diablo II! How did they do this! My god, look at this company's output, this Snowblind did 4 games in less time than we did 1! There's no way we can port Diablo to the PS2 now, not with this kind of competition.
    Blizdev1: Perhaps we should borrow some ideas.

  33. It's easy! by davec727 · · Score: 1

    One on your back, two on each arm, and one... well... you know. There.


    ...or, if you don't have a prehensile tail, you could just hang it on your penis.

  34. Re:Marvel Alliance Diablo gameplay by Ragzouken · · Score: 1

    I think you're more likely to be level 18 when fighting Duriel.

  35. Re:Blizzard borrowing yet more ideas from PS2 game by apoc06 · · Score: 1

    MPU

  36. Re:Marvel Alliance Diablo gameplay by Cornflake917 · · Score: 1

    E.g. - Bowazon vs. the boss Duriel. Small enclosed area with a very fast charge attack. Impossible when starting out because you are only level 8(?) (in the later two difficulties you better equipped/skilled/faster to handle him purely with a bow). You needed to put one point into Jab (the javalin tree) and wack away at him like that. You never use Jab again in the game. That should have been caught in playtesting.

    That's ridiculous. You don't ever have to put a point in any skill in the game that you will never use again. Just fill up on pots, get a well equipped merc. At worse it may take a while, or a few deaths if you're not careful. Methinks it's been awhile since you played because you could barely handle Act2 and level 8, much less Duriel. I am assuming you're talking about single player because this isn't even an issue in multiplayer.

    I'm guessing you're trying to say that Burizon's were overpowered? Buriza is hardly even used by bowazon's any more with the addition of rune words. I agree that Guided arrow is somewhat of a cheap skill in PvP. But as a lightning sorc I can just teleport around until they get bored of shooting and then one-shot them with lightning. I think there are some balance issues with some of the classes (there always are) but for the most part I believe they are pretty minor. Once the monsters got buffed the bowazon became much less effective.
     

  37. Re:Marvel Alliance Diablo gameplay by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

    >Just fill up on pots, get a well equipped merc. At worse it may take a while, or a few deaths if you're not careful.

    I wish it was that easy. Diablo was easier.
    As one example:
    http://discussions.hardwarecentral.com/archive/index.php/t-127713.html

    And you can't afford a few deaths playing on Hardcore.

    Buriza had 100% piercing. Guided Arrow changed the course of the arrow. So it went;
    1. Hit boss with guided.
    2. arrow pierces/passes through boss
    3. guided is still active, so arrow does a 180 back to the boss
    4. back to 1. up to five times.

    This was later corrected in a patch.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  38. Re:Marvel Alliance Diablo gameplay by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

    I stand corrected.

    --
    The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
  39. Kingdom Hearts? by Hyperhaplo · · Score: 1

    Okay, anyone else here reminded of the Kingdom Hearts health... kill enemies and the drop an appropriate amount of health and mana orbs equal to their level.. and you can have x number of potions to back you up when required.

    The system works really well - except that in the first part of the game you run around like a goonie picking up orbs.. whereas later in the game you get this nifty ability "treasure magnet" or similar that is like a whirlwind around you to automatically pick stuff up. Really really useful - no more spending a minute after each fight vainly trying to run over every health / mana orb you need. When you get the powerup for the TM it's really excellent - every fight has the chance to boost you to 70%+ health and mana. It can really suck when one party member needs health and another automatically picks up lots.. but besides that it's really good.

    I can see the idea working for D3.. but even so I can't see it working without the ability to self heal in some fashion.

    --
    You have a sick, twisted mind. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
  40. Re:Marvel Alliance Diablo gameplay by shivamib · · Score: 0

    Exactly. Those people haven't been to hell on ladder. It's another game entirely. Oh, the chills of telebaaling for hours.