Nainstalovat Steam
přihlásit se
|
jazyk
简体中文 (Zjednodušená čínština)
繁體中文 (Tradiční čínština)
日本語 (Japonština)
한국어 (Korejština)
ไทย (Thajština)
български (Bulharština)
Dansk (Dánština)
Deutsch (Němčina)
English (Angličtina)
Español-España (Evropská španělština)
Español-Latinoamérica (Latin. španělština)
Ελληνικά (Řečtina)
Français (Francouzština)
Italiano (Italština)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonéština)
Magyar (Maďarština)
Nederlands (Nizozemština)
Norsk (Norština)
Polski (Polština)
Português (Evropská portugalština)
Português-Brasil (Brazilská portugalština)
Română (Rumunština)
Русский (Ruština)
Suomi (Finština)
Svenska (Švédština)
Türkçe (Turečtina)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamština)
Українська (Ukrajinština)
Nahlásit problém s překladem
Toto téma bylo uzamčeno 
Pravidla a pokyny k diskuzím
9 
Nahlásit tento příspěvek
i have to correct you there m8, unless you talk about d1, but d2 you could hotkey every skill 'f1' 'f2' 'f3' and so on, you just couldnt see them on the 2 skilled hotbar, but you could change the skill on the fly, so that you were able to use them like a modern hotbar skill
Says the person reducing everyone's arguments to childlike rants (which literally nobody has done except you ironically) You are fun aren't you, absolutely convinced you are a troll now after the last few days of argument.
Oh the friend invite to discuss this in private is still open by the way, if you wish to not clutter up the thread.
Wait so you mean (and everyone who knows the genre knew this already) that games have had 'lots of meaningful keys' hmm that is interesting that sort of shoots down the OPs theory that all diablo likes have copied each other and failed to innovate the genre. It's almost as if hes talking absolute rot... who'd have thunk it
Dang, now I regret skipping 8 pages worth of posts. :/
So bring your body with you baby and I'll make you feel right
It's a freaky celebration of a natural kind
And the pleasure you'll experience will blow your mind
Freestyle's kickin' in the house tonight
Move your body from left to right
To all you freaks, don't stop the rock
That's freestyle speakin' and you know I'm right
an ARPG where you have to commit "points" into skills, will never have more then a wee handful of buttons, just due to the fact that you would spread the dmg too thin.
If you want to think of options and solutions, you should probably look into RPGs instead of ARPGs. Take Baldurs Gate 3. You got the option of rushing at everything like a mad bull or puzzle together solutions with your limited skills and tons useable items (both from inventory and the gameworld itself).
I dont know of any ARPG that pulled off using more then 3-5 skills actively. And frankly, i dont see an ARPG coming out anytime soon (or before) where it was really a viable option to spread your skills very thin over a dozen or more actively used abilitys. That just doesnt fit the fast paced gameplay.
Even looking at MMOs, there are only a few games with classes that use more then a handfull of abilitys regulary.
Even in RPGs, like Baldurs Gate 3 (sorry, played the ♥♥♥♥♥ out of it recently), i barely use more then a handfull of skills, saving items (scrolls, pots, stuff to throw) for "harder stuff", thats never coming.
For me the whole question of having a dozen or two dozens actively used skills, in ARPGs, that generally revolve around speed farming loot in endgame, isnt the question when or if it comes. Ask yourself, is it even possible? Even if you have tons of options for every build, with hundrets of skills, you will use your 3-5 abilitys for 99% of the game.
Even if you did, i doubt it would be a success, especially marketed as an ARPG, since you would probably miss what most ppl want from an ARPG.
Go and tear into this all you can. No, im not a native english speaker. No i pretty much never had a formal english education. Sue me.
I always think its funny, if threads like this go down into "your mama" territory. No matter how high/low the individual IQs of the participants are. I mean come on. Nobody cares at all. Everybody is here, cos they like gaming. Your fun to game with? That what matters, not an income, not an IQ. There is pretty much always someone who earns more or has an higher IQ.
It plainly doesnt matter.
One question i want to ask you is:
Why did you expect if you into a forum for a specific game, and basically say you want somethin thats totally different after years of effort put into it? Wouldnt it more sense to do that somewhere else?
Your targeted the wrong forum for your question and the wrong audience. That is partially why you got that feedback.
I mean, i dont like apple with their monopoly environment. But if i go into an apple forum and be like "when will anybody make a smartphone OS, that can actually properly share informations with a build in soulution to the other OS brands".
They wont care, there would be a backlash.
Basically, wrong forum, wrong audience. Thus it instantly looked like some1 who just came here for whining.
Lastly, i dont really care, im just giving my opinion here, cos im currently bored.
Attack of Wall of Text...
Game is good, #4buttons4life, keep games simple. Go play Divinity 2 if you want complex OP...
Those do heavily constrain the design, but they aren't the only options and they don't really make the game better. They do make the game less interesting to play, as few choices are offered outside the build stage.
As I said before, my partner and I play Guild Wars 2 as an ARPG, and it uses quite more than 3-5 skills, because the skills are not things you spread points between.
Marvel Heroes also had more than 5 slots which worked well on many of the characters, although they do typically fall into the false trap of "rotation" style play, where you have reasons to slot more skills, but you basically use them in a fixed pattern, so you are not actually getting the game play of more slots adding interesting play-time decisions, just more complexity in executing the build time decisions, which fails the (generally ignored) point of OP's plea: in-play decisions that both exist and are actually interesting.
Again, there are a lot more options than slotting different colored ways of throwing health damage. Options that are mostly unexplored because ARPG players have seemingly wholesale abandoned the idea that the games even can be interesting to play as well as to build.
Again, you assume slots just offer different ways to do health damage and that damage dealing efficiency is the only goal of play. The whole point of this topic (aside from bickering) is that we can do better than that. We have decades making and playing these games. They don't have to be designed as build efficiency testers that practically reduce to loot clickers.
This simply asserts we cannot have or consider change because change would be different.
No offense, but that's just a defeatist assumption rather than an argument. Obviously an ARPG that is more interesting to play is not trying to target only people who don't want more interesting play. Some Diablo-style looter ARPG buyers will enjoy more interesting play and some won't, but the point is engaging the market of people who seek more interesting play and are being left dissatisfied by the current low play standards.
It's a shame this conversation is always so hard to have due to attacks from status quo players (and the general toxicity of gamers talking about criticism). Players are getting left out, and everyone deserves games that engage and excite them.
GW2 is not the same genre of game as this. Its PVP centric MMO firstly (which is a major difference) and it is not remotely the same as a Diablo-like
Its a great game (though not as good as the first imo) but it its not a Diablo-like. And even that only has about 8 skills (if memory serves) the OP was talking 10 to 30 skills hence people questioning his stance.
Ehhhh that is kind of the entire point to be honest. Diablo-likes are loot clickers, the 'fun' comes two fold. Making builds using lots of stats and collecting loot to facilitate those builds. That is why MOST people play these games.
If people want excellently designed combat games they have souls likes (as one example) and action rpg's like Skyrim and many others. Part of what so many people took issue with as to the OP was that he fundamentally doesn't seem to understand or even like very much this genre of game.
Its like me going to the COD forums and saying its a generic borefest (It is imo) that needs to be entirely turned into a different genre of game. And I'm aware he says he wasn't trying to change this game, but it was posted on this games forum so people understandably took exception. Which was made worse by his combative responses.
Those games already exist. If the OP wants a game with 10 to 30 skills and complicated combat mechanics that isn't just a loot centric build focused game, those games exist (more of them exist than games like this) so why come to a board of one of these games to try to change it to a different genre?
Nobody 'deserves' games, they are entertainment that is created by others. If nobody is making the games he wants it means its to niche to be relevant to anyone beyond him. He says he has created graphics engines from scratch so perhaps he should make it himself no?
It certainly can be played as a ARPG (as I already stated, even playing it on controller), and it has 16 to 26+ combat abilities in play, reactive elements, combinable player actions, and a number of ideas that add a lot of play interest, like the break bar method of handling boss crowd control.
That is why many play them, but there are more playing than just that and more who didn't want the genre to stylize itself downward on that one, overly limited aspect. That is the point.
It's not really relevant that people who have not been driven from the genre by the doubling down on bad play and lack of ideas or imagination are fine with the status quo. That's completely obvious and just another version of "change is bad because change is different".
So, you exclude games that play and function very similarly as not belonging in the discussion, but you blithely dump people onto completely different kinds of games that also clearly don't satisfy any of the goals. That's extremely disingenuous.
I disagree completely the two games are nothing alike. GW2 is an MMORPG this is a diablo-like... but lets presume you are right and they are the same genre.
In which case the game the OP is asking for exists already which rather invalidates this doesn't it?
I mean you just pointed out a game that offers exactly what he wants no?
Games exist for those people that offer something different. Just not this one... do yo not think its a bit well selfish to want to turn a game into something else just to suit your needs, when they are already catered for?
THAT Is the point
There are actually relatively few Diablo-likes compared to full fledged action rpgs. Go play those if you want to play them.
Nothing blithe about it, Diablo-likes are their own sub genre (Id say genre but I know it triggers people saying that) Nobody who understands gameplay loops would ever suggest GW2 or say Skyrim are remotely similar to Diablo 2. There just is no discussion about that I'm afraid. All good games (well I dislike Skyrim but I recognise it has value) but all very different games. All ARPGs, but nobody would suggest they are the same genre.
In the same way that nobody would say COD, CS and Unreal Tournament are like each other despite all being FPS. Im not dumping anyone anywhere, Im suggesting they go play games that belong to genres they enjoy rather than trying to literally (as he literally is asking for this) redesign genres other people already enjoy to be completely different.
I love TBS, I dislike most RTS games, I would not go into an RTS forum and ask for its core gameplay elements to stripped out or reworked to suit my needs.