Diablo III Expansion Confirmed For PS4, Will be Playable at Blizzcon

Diablo III Expansion Confirmed For PS4, Will be Playable at Blizzcon

Diablo 3: Reaper of Souls image

It's possible we may see a simultaneous launch of Reaper of Souls on both PC and PS4.

Earlier in the month, Diablo III console senior level designer Matthew Berger told us that the game's first expansion pack, Reaper of Souls, will come to consoles, but "we don't exactly know how we're going to do it yet". It looks like they have figured it out, as the official PlayStation blog has announced the expansion will be playable at Blizzcon, both on PC and PS4.

"Attendees of the convention will also be some of the first in the world to take on Death itself using DualShock 4, armed with all-new social features and touch pad technology designed to help keep heroes on focused on what they do best: killing monsters."

Reaper of Souls was officially announced at GamesCon this year, and will feature a new class, a new act, a new artisan, and a plethora of loot and adventuring improvements. In true Blizzard style, it doesn't have an official release date yet, but we can probably expect it some time next year.

While Diablo III has been released for Xbox 360 and PS3 already, the Xbox One/PS4 launch also won't happen until 2014. Considering that the expansion is already playable on PS4, it seems somewhat likely that the next-gen release will combine the original game with the expansion (or at least, we will see the expansion launch shortly afterwards).

No word has been offered on when the expansion will make it across to current-gen consoles, but Berger said earlier that "we have to make sure that it is adapted to the console eco system in a way that is going to play the best way possible," and that this will take some time.

BlizzCon takes place November 8-9.

Source: Official PlayStation Blog

Permalink

Soooo did blizzard just decide screw pc gamers with this one? they get a superior version and the expansion tailor made with consoles in mind. I'm so exhausted with diablo 3 but damn what a waste of a good pc franchise. (I'm not being all pc master race here but a lot of the best parts about the diablo experience relied on PC as a platform it just seems strange to switch focus on a heavily entrenched title)

Ehh, Crate Entertainment just released Alpha Build 13 which added the Nightblade Mastery.

Goodbye Diablo, hello Grim Dawn!

Steven Bogos:
It's possible we may see a simultaneous launch of Reaper of Souls on both PC and PS4.

They've already confirmed otherwise.

Lylirra:
For those who were curious, yes -- we are looking to release Reaper of Souls on PC first (which is slated for 2014 as well).

Could very well mean that the next gen version will have RoS on launch though.

Loki_The_Good:
Soooo did blizzard just decide screw pc gamers with this one? they get a superior version and the expansion tailor made with consoles in mind. I'm so exhausted with diablo 3 but damn what a waste of a good pc franchise. (I'm not being all pc master race here but a lot of the best parts about the diablo experience relied on PC as a platform it just seems strange to switch focus on a heavily entrenched title)

I'm curious to see what your reasoning is for that. If you're referring to UI, control scheme or console specific features (dodge, boss battle tweaks etc) then fair enough, but I'm thinking you're referring to the loot changes. In which case your criticism is unfounded. "Loot 2.0" is coming to PC before consoles (along with a heap of other stuff), the loot changes that are available on consoles currently is commonly referred to as "Loot 1.5". This is because it has parts of "Loot 2.0" but not all of it. And why did this get on consoles and isn't on PC yet? Presumably because they wanted to give them the best experience they could at the time. And it isn't on PC because it is still an incomplete system.

Steven Bogos:
all-new social features and touch pad technology designed to help keep heroes on focused on what they do best: killing monsters.

In what way do "social" features do anything other than take focus from the actual playing of the game?

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
Soooo did blizzard just decide screw pc gamers with this one? they get a superior version and the expansion tailor made with consoles in mind. I'm so exhausted with diablo 3 but damn what a waste of a good pc franchise. (I'm not being all pc master race here but a lot of the best parts about the diablo experience relied on PC as a platform it just seems strange to switch focus on a heavily entrenched title)

I'm curious to see what your reasoning is for that. If you're referring to UI, control scheme or console specific features (dodge, boss battle tweaks etc) then fair enough, but I'm thinking you're referring to the loot changes. In which case your criticism is unfounded. "Loot 2.0" is coming to PC before consoles (along with a heap of other stuff), the loot changes that are available on consoles currently is commonly referred to as "Loot 1.5". This is because it has parts of "Loot 2.0" but not all of it. And why did this get on consoles and isn't on PC yet? Presumably because they wanted to give them the best experience they could at the time. And it isn't on PC because it is still an incomplete system.

Was not talking about loot at all. Where did you get that? I'm talking about the numerous design and game play choices they're making now with the though to keep it console friendly. UI and control scheme are just the starting point for numerous tweaks in order to make the finished product work together. Out of curiosity do you know how well blizzard pays these days. That redirect was politician level PR.

Loki_The_Good:
Was not talking about loot at all. Where did you get that? I'm talking about the numerous design and game play choices they're making now with the though to keep it console friendly. UI and control scheme are just the starting point for numerous tweaks in order to make the finished product work together. Out of curiosity do you know how well blizzard pays these days. That redirect was politician level PR.

There was no redirect there at all, I covered all of the reasons I could think of and expanded on the only one that isn't 100% subjective and that is also the most common. UI and control scheme, as I said, is fair enough. That just comes down to what is your personal preference.

Can you elaborate on the "numerous design and game play choices they're making now with the thought to keep it console friendly"? I'm not sure what you are talking about here. I haven't seen any information, whether announced or datamined, suggesting this.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
Was not talking about loot at all. Where did you get that? I'm talking about the numerous design and game play choices they're making now with the though to keep it console friendly. UI and control scheme are just the starting point for numerous tweaks in order to make the finished product work together. Out of curiosity do you know how well blizzard pays these days. That redirect was politician level PR.

There was no redirect there at all, I covered all of the reasons I could think of and expanded on the only one that isn't 100% subjective and that is also the most common. UI and control scheme, as I said, is fair enough. That just comes down to what is your personal preference.

Can you elaborate on the "numerous design and game play choices they're making now with the thought to keep it console friendly"? I'm not sure what you are talking about here. I haven't seen any information, whether announced or datamined, suggesting this.

It's just basic game design the limitations of the controller affects what the player can do with the character and in tern what can be done with the AI as a well designed game wouldn't create circumstances that are approachable by the player or ask unreasonable things. Every design choice has a ripple effect through the game in order for it to be cohesive. Loot wise it pretty much stops the use of items with charges or active abilities because access would be too clunky. Now they probably wouldn't do that anyways but it's an example of how controls have a direct effect on other elements of the game. likewise ranged precision targeting in an isometric view while easy to do with a mouse is far more difficult to do with a controller. This affects the types of skills that are usable and viable and also to some degree enemy attacks as and behaviors. This doesn't need to be datamined this is common sense and basic game design theory.

Loki_The_Good:
a well designed game wouldn't create circumstances that are approachable by the player

Sure...

or ask unreasonable things.

D3 doesn't, closest would be related to the pretty average drops which are soon to be fixed.

Loot wise it pretty much stops the use of items with charges or active abilities because access would be too clunky.

There are active abilities on some legendaries. The Hellfire ring being just one example. But I presume you're referring to how in D2 gear could roll a "+x to y skill" affix. That's just a general design decision, there's no real reason they didn't implement it beyond them simply not wanting to do it. Consoles don't justify it at all because it would be no clunkier than however console players currently select skills.

likewise ranged precision targeting in an isometric view while easy to do with a mouse is far more difficult to do with a controller. This affects the types of skills that are usable and viable and also to some degree enemy attacks as and behaviors.

Eh, from what I've heard the console version does reasonably well in this regard. Only things I've heard that are tricky are skills like the Witch Doctor's Grasp of the Dead which you'd want to be using in front of enemies rather than on them. And I don't see how that relates back to Blizzard "screwing" PC players.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
a well designed game wouldn't create circumstances that are approachable by the player

Sure...

or ask unreasonable things.

D3 doesn't, closest would be related to the pretty average drops which are soon to be fixed.

Loot wise it pretty much stops the use of items with charges or active abilities because access would be too clunky.

There are active abilities on some legendaries. The Hellfire ring being just one example. But I presume you're referring to how in D2 gear could roll a "+x to y skill" affix. That's just a general design decision, there's no real reason they didn't implement it beyond them simply not wanting to do it. Consoles don't justify it at all because it would be no clunkier than however console players currently select skills.

likewise ranged precision targeting in an isometric view while easy to do with a mouse is far more difficult to do with a controller. This affects the types of skills that are usable and viable and also to some degree enemy attacks as and behaviors.

Eh, from what I've heard the console version does reasonably well in this regard. Only things I've heard that are tricky are skills like the Witch Doctor's Grasp of the Dead which you'd want to be using in front of enemies rather than on them. And I don't see how that relates back to Blizzard "screwing" PC players.

Not sure if your just intentionally missing the point or what. For one hellfire ring doesn't have an active ability an active ability is an ability you deliberately activate ie press trigger button gain life press trigger button shoot fireball. A chance to fire a hellfire ball on attack is a passive ability because you have no control over when it triggers. The need for a separately bound button is why a game designer who is thinking about controller limitations would not use it. This is the point consoles have specific limitations and if they are thinking of designing the game with console as high priority those limitations will affect design choices. How do you not understand this? It's really simple. Like REALLY simple.

Loki_The_Good:
Not sure if your just intentionally missing the point or what. For one hellfire ring doesn't have an active ability an active ability is an ability you deliberately activate ie press trigger button gain life press trigger button shoot fireball. A chance to fire a hellfire ball on attack is a passive ability because you have no control over when it triggers. The need for a separately bound button is why a game designer who is thinking about controller limitations would not use it. This is the point consoles have specific limitations and if they are thinking of designing the game with console as high priority those limitations will affect design choices. How do you not understand this? It's really simple. Like REALLY simple.

Not sure if you're just intentionally ignoring what I write or what. Like I said, consoles don't justify the lack of the "+x to y skill" type affixes at all. There's no reason to have an extra button bound specifically for gear based skills (Which runs into the issue of having them on more than one piece). The only way to reasonably implement gear based skills would be to just add a "gear" category on the skills screen, letting them be bound to one of the five restriction free slots. So like I said, not a console caused design decision but rather a regular design decision.

And I agree that the limitations of consoles force design decisions. And if you had of backed that point up with some of the more common arguments then my response would have been along the lines of "That's all speculation but fair enough". But it still wouldn't relate back to your original point at all.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
Not sure if your just intentionally missing the point or what. For one hellfire ring doesn't have an active ability an active ability is an ability you deliberately activate ie press trigger button gain life press trigger button shoot fireball. A chance to fire a hellfire ball on attack is a passive ability because you have no control over when it triggers. The need for a separately bound button is why a game designer who is thinking about controller limitations would not use it. This is the point consoles have specific limitations and if they are thinking of designing the game with console as high priority those limitations will affect design choices. How do you not understand this? It's really simple. Like REALLY simple.

Not sure if you're just intentionally ignoring what I write or what. Like I said, consoles don't justify the lack of the "+x to y skill" type affixes at all. There's no reason to have an extra button bound specifically for gear based skills (Which runs into the issue of having them on more than one piece). The only way to reasonably implement gear based skills would be to just add a "gear" category on the skills screen, letting them be bound to one of the five restriction free slots. So like I said, not a console caused design decision but rather a regular design decision.

And I agree that the limitations of consoles force design decisions. And if you had of backed that point up with some of the more common arguments then my response would have been along the lines of "That's all speculation but fair enough". But it still wouldn't relate back to your original point at all.

I'm intentionally ignoring parts of what you write because it has nothing to do with anything I said. Like the "+x to y skill" type affixes- never mentioned that - not once - never talked about it - it has nothing to do with anything but you keep arguing it like your making some sort of point. It's actually making this conversation surreal. Since we're talking about expansions I'm not talking about the existing frame work; new skill slots could be added with a new expansion. Further I already said this was probably not a direction they'd go anyways but an example of a direction that they now could not go because a controller only has so many buttons so adding new slots would be difficult to fit on a controller. Again hypothetical example of how the limitations of a console can affect game a wider variety of game design decisions then you mentioned. The limitations of consoles compared to the PC is vastly different and I would prefer a game working with what a PC can do then worrying about what a console can because it is almost always more inferior an experience for PC users. Hence PC users get screwed so they can focus on console hence my original point. Feel free to make something else up that I m in no way talking about to further "making points against me" or whatever your trying to do I'm done talking about this mess of a game.

And Blizzard continues to fix Diablo 3 and make it 'better' it seems. Good for new players but I am not going back. I used to be a big fan of this. Diablo 1 and 2 were classics. Spent ages playing both. I had my doubts on D3 but I still supported them because I had faith. But after playing through the mess that was D3, I have had enough. The auction house and enrage timer combination to force players to buy the best loot in Inferno difficulty is inexcusable. And with the withdrawal of PVP and the auction house (later), I can't imagine why this still has to stay always online. Got DCed multiple times fighting infernal bosses due to connection issues or server maintenance and it was hell! A total sign of Publisher mistrust on its customers. I trusted them with the auction house and game economy, now it is broken and I can't buy anything due to the hyper-inflated prices because of bugs. Yeah, they will fix things but they will not be able to give me back all the time and hardship I had to go through because of their bad decisions. I'm done with these guys.

Loki_The_Good:
I'm intentionally ignoring parts of what you write because it has nothing to do with anything I said. Like the "+x to y skill" type affixes- never mentioned that - not once - never talked about it - it has nothing to do with anything but you keep arguing it like your making some sort of point.

Except you specifically said "Loot wise it pretty much stops the use of items with charges or active abilities because access would be too clunky" which is exactly what the "+x to y skill" kind of affixes are.

It's actually making this conversation surreal. Since we're talking about expansions I'm not talking about the existing frame work; new skill slots could be added with a new expansion. Further I already said this was probably not a direction they'd go anyways but an example of a direction that they now could not go because a controller only has so many buttons so adding new slots would be difficult to fit on a controller.

Finally! A point which can be argued in a way that can support your original point. Of which I'd argue otherwise because there are still easily accessible buttons that are unused. Why have them unused when your limitation is the amount of buttons available?

The limitations of consoles compared to the PC is vastly different and I would prefer a game working with what a PC can do then worrying about what a console can because it is almost always more inferior an experience for PC users.

That's only a little unreasonable. I mean, it's not like they'd have to rewrite pretty much everything mechanically or anything.

Hence PC users get screwed so they can focus on console hence my original point.

Yeah, you finally got there. Would've been quicker if you didn't change what you were saying with every post. "Was not talking about loot at all" to " Loot wise it pretty much stops the use of items with charges or active abilities because access would be too clunky" to "Like the "+x to y skill" type affixes- never mentioned that - not once - never talked about it - it has nothing to do with anything". Stick to one thing next time please, makes it easier on everyone.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
I'm intentionally ignoring parts of what you write because it has nothing to do with anything I said. Like the "+x to y skill" type affixes- never mentioned that - not once - never talked about it - it has nothing to do with anything but you keep arguing it like your making some sort of point.

Except you specifically said "Loot wise it pretty much stops the use of items with charges or active abilities because access would be too clunky" which is exactly what the "+x to y skill" kind of affixes are.

It's actually making this conversation surreal. Since we're talking about expansions I'm not talking about the existing frame work; new skill slots could be added with a new expansion. Further I already said this was probably not a direction they'd go anyways but an example of a direction that they now could not go because a controller only has so many buttons so adding new slots would be difficult to fit on a controller.

Finally! A point which can be argued in a way that can support your original point. Of which I'd argue otherwise because there are still easily accessible buttons that are unused. Why have them unused when your limitation is the amount of buttons available?

The limitations of consoles compared to the PC is vastly different and I would prefer a game working with what a PC can do then worrying about what a console can because it is almost always more inferior an experience for PC users.

That's only a little unreasonable. I mean, it's not like they'd have to rewrite pretty much everything mechanically or anything.

Hence PC users get screwed so they can focus on console hence my original point.

Yeah, you finally got there. Would've been quicker if you didn't change what you were saying with every post. "Was not talking about loot at all" to " Loot wise it pretty much stops the use of items with charges or active abilities because access would be too clunky" to "Like the "+x to y skill" type affixes- never mentioned that - not once - never talked about it - it has nothing to do with anything". Stick to one thing next time please, makes it easier on everyone.

Nice try but no "+x to y skill" is a passive skill buff an active skill is a skill you activate on it's own and functions as it's own special skill unique to the wearer of the equipment its related to ie an item with that says something along the lines of "activating this ring fires a beam of lightning deal 100-200 damage + intelligence with a cool down of 2 minutes" and charged items are generally items that replicate certain skills or abilities both from enemy and character skill sets with a set number of uses before it expires or needs to be recharged. It's okay you learn this kind of terminology with time.

Loki_The_Good:
Nice try but no "+x to y skill" is a passive skill buff an active skill is a skill you activate on it's own and functions as it's own special skill unique to the wearer of the equipment its related to ie an item with that says something along the lines of "activating this ring fires a beam of lightning deal 100-200 damage + intelligence with a cool down of 2 minutes" and charged items are generally items that replicate certain skills or abilities both from enemy and character skill sets with a set number of uses before it expires or needs to be recharged. It's okay you learn this kind of terminology with time.

Ah, now I get why you've been responding like that. You've never played D2 have you? And if so you clearly haven't done any research on it. Let me explain it to you. In D2, there is an affix that gives "+x to y skill". When these are rolled as a random property they give you a nice buff to one of your skills. However, when they are a unique property or come from runes, they grant you a skill, no matter what class you are. A notable example is Wolfhowl, a unique barb helm that gives you access to some druid skills. Then there's the runes as well like Enigma which lets you teleport. All they did was add the skill to your pool, no specific buttons or slots for gear specific skills. So like I said, no reason for it to not be in D3 other than they didn't want to implement them.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
Nice try but no "+x to y skill" is a passive skill buff an active skill is a skill you activate on it's own and functions as it's own special skill unique to the wearer of the equipment its related to ie an item with that says something along the lines of "activating this ring fires a beam of lightning deal 100-200 damage + intelligence with a cool down of 2 minutes" and charged items are generally items that replicate certain skills or abilities both from enemy and character skill sets with a set number of uses before it expires or needs to be recharged. It's okay you learn this kind of terminology with time.

Ah, now I get why you've been responding like that. You've never played D2 have you? And if so you clearly haven't done any research on it. Let me explain it to you. In D2, there is an affix that gives "+x to y skill". When these are rolled as a random property they give you a nice buff to one of your skills. However, when they are a unique property or come from runes, they grant you a skill, no matter what class you are. A notable example is Wolfhowl, a unique barb helm that gives you access to some druid skills. Then there's the runes as well like Enigma which lets you teleport. All they did was add the skill to your pool, no specific buttons or slots for gear specific skills. So like I said, no reason for it to not be in D3 other than they didn't want to implement them.

yaaa they're still passive skill buffs just for skills you normally don't have but a least I understand the confusion. I forgot they used them to introduce new skills to characters but honestly as you said this just dumps a few new skills into the already established skill pool. Active abilities on items are in their own isolated skill pool cast directly from the equipment. Its a fine line but an active ability is activated directly by the player and generally lasts a fixed time frame a passive ability is always active and functions without the players input. That +1 to teleport for example is passive because it continuously grants a +1 bonus to teleport. The fact that teleport would be inaccessible to the character without it is just an additional benefit of the passive buff. The reason why I'm even bothering to point out the distinction is because an actual active ability presents problems towards control complex it both in terms of binding the skill to a button and since most of these skills would be undesirable in a regular skill slot because they tend to be situational or with longer cool downs (they don't have to be but are made so generally to distinguish them from class skills and make sure that class skills are never overshadowed as every class just aiming for the same armor to use the same skill kills the diversity of the classes and is just bad design) the requirement of additional buttons and the more complex way to bind such skills makes them a less then desirable prospect when designed for a controller whereas with a mouse and keyboard the mouse can navigate the menus efficiently and there are more then enough keys on a keyboard.

Loki_The_Good:
yaaa they're still passive skill buffs just for skills you normally don't have

But you can't buff things you don't even have. It's like saying an affix that "Grants the player 10% additional damage which is dealt as fire damage" is the same as "Increases fire damage by 10%". Which it isn't. One gives you fire damage, the other increases your fire damage.

Active abilities on items are in their own isolated skill pool cast directly from the equipment.

Why do they need to be isolated? Why do they need to be casted directly from the equipment? All that does is make the system harder to use.

Its a fine line but an active ability is activated directly by the player and generally lasts a fixed time frame a passive ability is always active and functions without the players input.

And that's exactly why these are active, rather than passive. Wolfhowl doesn't make you permanently a werewolf, you need to activate it. Enigma doesn't make your every move a teleport, you have to activate it. Of course you could argue that they are passive because they are permanently (at least while it's equipped) giving you access to an ability. Although if you go with that logic then there is no such thing is an active ability on an item outside of consumables like potions.
EDIT: Also, how can you blame consoles for a lack of "active" skills on items in D3 when you are arguing that they aren't "active" in D2, which is a PC exclusive?

The reason why I'm even bothering to point out the distinction is because an actual active ability presents problems towards control complex it both in terms of binding the skill to a button and since most of these skills would be undesirable in a regular skill slot because they tend to be situational or with longer cool downs (they don't have to be but are made so generally to distinguish them from class skills and make sure that class skills are never overshadowed as every class just aiming for the same armor to use the same skill kills the diversity of the classes and is just bad design) the requirement of additional buttons and the more complex way to bind such skills makes them a less then desirable prospect when designed for a controller whereas with a mouse and keyboard the mouse can navigate the menus efficiently and there are more then enough keys on a keyboard.

Easily fixed by what I already suggested, just add them as an additional skill category which you can bind to any of the currently open slots. If you go and make a button dedicated to "gear skills" then you kill diversity by restricting them to a single gear skill when they might need 3 or 4 to make their build how they want. If instead you map a button to each piece then you have to use an additional 12 buttons for them, even on PC that's just silly. So it not being there is certainly not the fault of consoles because of the 3 implementations available for it, 2 cause issues on not only consoles but PC as well, and the other doesn't cause any issues beyond what is already present.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
yaaa they're still passive skill buffs just for skills you normally don't have

But you can't buff things you don't even have. It's like saying an affix that "Grants the player 10% additional damage which is dealt as fire damage" is the same as "Increases fire damage by 10%". Which it isn't. One gives you fire damage, the other increases your fire damage.

Active abilities on items are in their own isolated skill pool cast directly from the equipment.

Why do they need to be isolated? Why do they need to be casted directly from the equipment? All that does is make the system harder to use.

Its a fine line but an active ability is activated directly by the player and generally lasts a fixed time frame a passive ability is always active and functions without the players input.

And that's exactly why these are active, rather than passive. Wolfhowl doesn't make you permanently a werewolf, you need to activate it. Enigma doesn't make your every move a teleport, you have to activate it. Of course you could argue that they are passive because they are permanently (at least while it's equipped) giving you access to an ability. Although if you go with that logic then there is no such thing is an active ability on an item outside of consumables like potions.
EDIT: Also, how can you blame consoles for a lack of "active" skills on items in D3 when you are arguing that they aren't "active" in D2, which is a PC exclusive?

The reason why I'm even bothering to point out the distinction is because an actual active ability presents problems towards control complex it both in terms of binding the skill to a button and since most of these skills would be undesirable in a regular skill slot because they tend to be situational or with longer cool downs (they don't have to be but are made so generally to distinguish them from class skills and make sure that class skills are never overshadowed as every class just aiming for the same armor to use the same skill kills the diversity of the classes and is just bad design) the requirement of additional buttons and the more complex way to bind such skills makes them a less then desirable prospect when designed for a controller whereas with a mouse and keyboard the mouse can navigate the menus efficiently and there are more then enough keys on a keyboard.

Easily fixed by what I already suggested, just add them as an additional skill category which you can bind to any of the currently open slots. If you go and make a button dedicated to "gear skills" then you kill diversity by restricting them to a single gear skill when they might need 3 or 4 to make their build how they want. If instead you map a button to each piece then you have to use an additional 12 buttons for them, even on PC that's just silly. So it not being there is certainly not the fault of consoles because of the 3 implementations available for it, 2 cause issues on not only consoles but PC as well, and the other doesn't cause any issues beyond what is already present.

No its not active because the item doesn't give you teleport it gives you a bonus to teleport which gives the prerequisite to use the skill. The effect is arguably similar but method of approach (and therefore the implementation which matters more in arguments of design) is completely different. I'm sorry your just wrong look up what these words mean before you argue.

Loki_The_Good:
No its not active because the item doesn't give you teleport it gives you a bonus to teleport which gives the prerequisite to use the skill. The effect is arguably similar but method of approach (and therefore the implementation which matters more in arguments of design) is completely different. I'm sorry your just wrong look up what these words mean before you argue.

Apply the same thing to Wolfhowl then, because that is set up in the exact same way. But wait, that'd ruin your argument wouldn't it? Because the only difference between Wolfhowl saying "+3-6 to Werewolf" and "Allows the user to transform into a werewolf at will" is the tooltip. Following your argument the latter would be an "active" skill and the former would be passive, but how can that be when there is no mechanical difference?

I like how you ignore everything that you know proves you wrong too. Like "Also, how can you blame consoles for a lack of "active" skills on items in D3 when you are arguing that they aren't "active" in D2, which is a PC exclusive?" which removes the legitimacy of your original argument completely.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
No its not active because the item doesn't give you teleport it gives you a bonus to teleport which gives the prerequisite to use the skill. The effect is arguably similar but method of approach (and therefore the implementation which matters more in arguments of design) is completely different. I'm sorry your just wrong look up what these words mean before you argue.

Apply the same thing to Wolfhowl then, because that is set up in the exact same way. But wait, that'd ruin your argument wouldn't it? Because the only difference between Wolfhowl saying "+3-6 to Werewolf" and "Allows the user to transform into a werewolf at will" is the tooltip. Following your argument the latter would be an "active" skill and the former would be passive, but how can that be when there is no mechanical difference?

I like how you ignore everything that you know proves you wrong too. Like "Also, how can you blame consoles for a lack of "active" skills on items in D3 when you are arguing that they aren't "active" in D2, which is a PC exclusive?" which removes the legitimacy of your original argument completely.

Except for I wasn't saying about how it was in D2 honestly I was thinking league of legends or some mmos rpgs like warcraft or skyrim. Again you keep making things up and then say that I fail to address them I can't anticipate hallucinations. And yes the same goes for wolf howl if the bonus effect is +3-6 werewolf then that is a constant passive buff to a otherwise locked and zero sum skill. The tool tip simply describes how that buff is used but it is still passive because the +3-6 to werewolf DOES NOT NEED TO BE ACTIVATED it remains passively on so long as the equipment remains on. you can frame it a hundred different ways all of them are wrong.

Kahani:

Steven Bogos:
all-new social features and touch pad technology designed to help keep heroes on focused on what they do best: killing monsters.

In what way do "social" features do anything other than take focus from the actual playing of the game?

Fully agree but reckon this is in need of an Oxford comma, "all-new social features, and touch pad technology designed to help keep heroes focused on what they do best: killing monsters" - quite how touch pad tech does that, over, say, a button, is another matter.

Loki_The_Good:
And yes the same goes for wolf howl if the bonus effect is +3-6 werewolf then that is a constant passive buff to a otherwise locked and zero sum skill. The tool tip simply describes how that buff is used but it is still passive because the +3-6 to werewolf DOES NOT NEED TO BE ACTIVATED it remains passively on so long as the equipment remains on. you can frame it a hundred different ways all of them are wrong.

So, like I said before, by your definition of "active" skills on items, they don't exist at all. By your definition an item that has a tooltip reading something along the lines of "Allows the user to use X at will" (Where X is some skill) is just a passive because it permanently (At least while it's equipped) unlocks a skill for you to use. See how stupid that definition sounds?

Also, let me explain a little to you about the design behind that affix, which should be clear to you with how much you claim to know about game design. There are 3 reasons why the tooltip is "+3-6 Werewolf" rather than "Allows the user to become a werewolf at will". The first is a programming thing, it's much easier to use existing infrastructure rather than making it from scratch. The other two are design related, the first being that it makes it easy for the user to recognise that it is the same werewolf skill that is available to the druid. The second being that it makes it clear that it can be buffed by regular "+x to werewolf" affixes. That's all about creating a better experience for the player, there's no difference mechanically, but it makes it more intuitive.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
And yes the same goes for wolf howl if the bonus effect is +3-6 werewolf then that is a constant passive buff to a otherwise locked and zero sum skill. The tool tip simply describes how that buff is used but it is still passive because the +3-6 to werewolf DOES NOT NEED TO BE ACTIVATED it remains passively on so long as the equipment remains on. you can frame it a hundred different ways all of them are wrong.

So, like I said before, by your definition of "active" skills on items, they don't exist at all. By your definition an item that has a tooltip reading something along the lines of "Allows the user to use X at will" (Where X is some skill) is just a passive because it permanently (At least while it's equipped) unlocks a skill for you to use. See how stupid that definition sounds?

Also, let me explain a little to you about the design behind that affix, which should be clear to you with how much you claim to know about game design. There are 3 reasons why the tooltip is "+3-6 Werewolf" rather than "Allows the user to become a werewolf at will". The first is a programming thing, it's much easier to use existing infrastructure rather than making it from scratch. The other two are design related, the first being that it makes it easy for the user to recognise that it is the same werewolf skill that is available to the druid. The second being that it makes it clear that it can be buffed by regular "+x to werewolf" affixes. That's all about creating a better experience for the player, there's no difference mechanically, but it makes it more intuitive.

yes the designers decided to use the benefits of a passive skill to give the benefits of a new ability rather then program active abilities into the game. Its a neat work around but they sill did it using passive skills. And by my definition plenty of other games have active skills just not the diablo franchise (except they do abilities that use charges such as wolfhowl's other affix: Level 15 Summon Dire Wolf (18 Charges) are a type of active skill.) It's nice you ignored my list of games that have that such skills. Just because it wasn't in a previous game doesn't mean they couldn't add it in as a new skill type for the expansion the expansion to diablo 2 introduced plenty of new game elements. I know 3 just likes to stream line and iterate but they could have go for something interesting. Anyways as I said before keep framing it a different way your still wrong by definition of the term. How wrong is he Kevin Spacey?


Wow that's wrong.

Loki_The_Good:
yes the designers decided to use the benefits of a passive skill to give the benefits of a new ability rather then program active abilities into the game. Its a neat work around but they sill did it using passive skills. And by my definition plenty of other games have active skills just not the diablo franchise.

And that's how active skills on items were implemented in Diablo 2. "+x to y skill" or "Allows the user to cast a fireball" or even Dota's "right click this item to cast a fireball" are just different implementations of the same concept which is "Allow the player to use a skill they wouldn't normally be able to". The only difference between these is how the player uses them, whether that be directly clicking the item or being able to bound it to a button, and how they interpret it, knowing whether or not it would be buffed by other items. So you're not arguing the mechanics, or the design behind them, but rather the way in which it gets incorporated into the UI. Try to apply the Dota method to Diablo, it becomes a chore to use, or the Diablo method to Dota, it just adds extra clutter to the UI. See, each game implements the idea in a different way which suits the style of game it is. There's nothing that says you have to copy another games implementation of a concept if you want to add it to your own game. That, is what poor game design is. Finding a way to smoothly integrate the concept into your game. That, is good game design.

It's nice you ignored my list of games that have that such skills.

Because I have no experience with League of Legends (although the above Dota bit would probably be somewhat relatable), little experience with World of Warcraft and Skyrim is on consoles as well as PC, which kinda kills your argument.

Just because it wasn't in a previous game doesn't mean they couldn't add it in as a new skill type for the expansion the expansion to diablo 2 introduced plenty of new game elements. I know 3 just likes to stream line and iterate but they could have go for something interesting.

So you're saying your argument is just bs then? I mean the whole 'They can't implement active skills on items because consoles' thing. Because like I said (And you just said), there's no reason why they couldn't do it.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
yes the designers decided to use the benefits of a passive skill to give the benefits of a new ability rather then program active abilities into the game. Its a neat work around but they sill did it using passive skills. And by my definition plenty of other games have active skills just not the diablo franchise.

And that's how active skills on items were implemented in Diablo 2. "+x to y skill" or "Allows the user to cast a fireball" or even Dota's "right click this item to cast a fireball" are just different implementations of the same concept which is "Allow the player to use a skill they wouldn't normally be able to". The only difference between these is how the player uses them, whether that be directly clicking the item or being able to bound it to a button, and how they interpret it, knowing whether or not it would be buffed by other items. So you're not arguing the mechanics, or the design behind them, but rather the way in which it gets incorporated into the UI. Try to apply the Dota method to Diablo, it becomes a chore to use, or the Diablo method to Dota, it just adds extra clutter to the UI. See, each game implements the idea in a different way which suits the style of game it is. There's nothing that says you have to copy another games implementation of a concept if you want to add it to your own game. That, is what poor game design is. Finding a way to smoothly integrate the concept into your game. That, is good game design.

It's nice you ignored my list of games that have that such skills.

Because I have no experience with League of Legends (although the above Dota bit would probably be somewhat relatable), little experience with World of Warcraft and Skyrim is on consoles as well as PC, which kinda kills your argument.

Just because it wasn't in a previous game doesn't mean they couldn't add it in as a new skill type for the expansion the expansion to diablo 2 introduced plenty of new game elements. I know 3 just likes to stream line and iterate but they could have go for something interesting.

So you're saying your argument is just bs then? I mean the whole 'They can't implement active skills on items because consoles' thing. Because like I said (And you just said), there's no reason why they couldn't do it.

Look up in the air its a bird it a plane its th point going right over your head. They COULD implement it but they won't because it's clunky if they're thinking console first its not impossible but it's a poor choice for a console focused game. Skyrim has a completely different UI and pacing compared to Diablo 3 and it's still far clunkier to do on skyrim with a controller then with keyboard but skyrim and elder scrolls in general is still heavily PC minded and even then most people use the UI mod to fix some of the concessions the had to make for the UI to be even remotely compatible with a controller. As for active skills well that was another swing and a miss again. Active skills aren't skills that give you abilities they are skills you ACTIVATE and generally function like abilities. So just because an item can grant an ability doesn't make it an active item skill or affix. Simple question to figure it out do you have to do anything to get +1 to teleport? No then it is a passive skill. The item grants a +1 passive boost to teleport and that is it the character then gains the skill from the inherent buff. So once again your still .. Oh I'll let Weird Al say it:

Loki_The_Good:
They COULD implement it but they won't because it's clunky if they're thinking console first its not impossible but it's a poor choice for a console focused game. Skyrim has a completely different UI and pacing compared to Diablo 3 and it's still far clunkier to do on skyrim with a controller then with keyboard but skyrim and elder scrolls in general is still heavily PC minded and even then most people use the UI mod to fix some of the concessions the had to make for the UI to be even remotely compatible with a controller.

Except Skyrim's lead platform was the 360, hence why the UI is the way it is. Of course it's generally accepted it is better on PC thanks to mods but that doesn't change what it was built for. If PC was the lead for it, then we would've had all the modding tools available from Day one. And you're idea of active skills on items (of having to click the item rather than a shortcut) wouldn't just be clunky on consoles, it would be clunky on pc. Not to mention how much it opens up human error. Couldn't be much worse if you're in hardcore fighting against some elites then you pop open your inventory to activate a skill but instead you misclick and end up swapping one of your items so your survivability drops and you are promptly killed. Or hell, you could even end up dropping that godly amulet you found for it to promptly be stolen by another player.

Active skills aren't skills that give you abilities they are skills you ACTIVATE and generally function like abilities.

I know, the "skills that give you abilities" would be like "On Kill: A chance to summon a skeleton". The "skills you activate and generally function like abilities" are things like Wolfhowl letting you turn into a werewolf when you activate it.

So just because an item can grant an ability doesn't make it an active item skill or affix. Simple question to figure it out do you have to do anything to get +1 to teleport? No then it is a passive skill. The item grants a +1 passive boost to teleport and that is it the character then gains the skill from the inherent buff.

It's not that the item can grant an ability, it's that it does grant an ability. That can be applied to something like a "Staff of firebolts" from Dota that would have on it something along the lines of "Use this item to cast a firebolt". You can just say "do you have to do anything to be able to get the ability to use the firebolt?" and the answer is obviously no. That doesn't mean it isn't an active skill on an item though.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
They COULD implement it but they won't because it's clunky if they're thinking console first its not impossible but it's a poor choice for a console focused game. Skyrim has a completely different UI and pacing compared to Diablo 3 and it's still far clunkier to do on skyrim with a controller then with keyboard but skyrim and elder scrolls in general is still heavily PC minded and even then most people use the UI mod to fix some of the concessions the had to make for the UI to be even remotely compatible with a controller.

Except Skyrim's lead platform was the 360, hence why the UI is the way it is. Of course it's generally accepted it is better on PC thanks to mods but that doesn't change what it was built for. If PC was the lead for it, then we would've had all the modding tools available from Day one. And you're idea of active skills on items (of having to click the item rather than a shortcut) wouldn't just be clunky on consoles, it would be clunky on pc. Not to mention how much it opens up human error. Couldn't be much worse if you're in hardcore fighting against some elites then you pop open your inventory to activate a skill but instead you misclick and end up swapping one of your items so your survivability drops and you are promptly killed. Or hell, you could even end up dropping that godly amulet you found for it to promptly be stolen by another player.

Active skills aren't skills that give you abilities they are skills you ACTIVATE and generally function like abilities.

I know, the "skills that give you abilities" would be like "On Kill: A chance to summon a skeleton". The "skills you activate and generally function like abilities" are things like Wolfhowl letting you turn into a werewolf when you activate it.

So just because an item can grant an ability doesn't make it an active item skill or affix. Simple question to figure it out do you have to do anything to get +1 to teleport? No then it is a passive skill. The item grants a +1 passive boost to teleport and that is it the character then gains the skill from the inherent buff.

It's not that the item can grant an ability, it's that it does grant an ability. That can be applied to something like a "Staff of firebolts" from Dota that would have on it something along the lines of "Use this item to cast a firebolt". You can just say "do you have to do anything to be able to get the ability to use the firebolt?" and the answer is obviously no. That doesn't mean it isn't an active skill on an item though.

You really should look up for that point its a nice one. Short cutting the ability is exactly what I said yo had to do with active skills. On many games you short cut the ability from the item hence needing to click on it to bind it to a shortcut. You just generally wouldn't want to bind it to your main abilities. for example in skyrim the item active abilities I find useful are generally on my quick bar on a 7 or 8. Your second point is already wrong from my third point below sooo I'll just ignore that. As for your dota example the question isn't do you have to do anything to get the ability to use fireball?" the ability says "Use this item to CAST A FIREBOLT" the question is do you have to do anything to CAST A FIREBOLT. The answer is yes because that is an active ability. It's about time you actually mentioned one. Anyways your still wrong. I believe this is variation 4 are you aiming for the full 100 variations of wrongness? it wasn't really supposed to be a challenge.

Loki_The_Good:
You really should look up for that point its a nice one. Short cutting the ability is exactly what I said yo had to do with active skills. On many games you short cut the ability from the item hence needing to click on it to bind it to a shortcut. You just generally wouldn't want to bind it to your main abilities. for example in skyrim the item active abilities I find useful are generally on my quick bar on a 7 or 8.

Which is what you do with things like Wolfhowl in Diablo 2. You bind the skills from it to one of your function keys or directly to the mouse.

As for your dota example the question isn't do you have to do anything to get the ability to use fireball?" the ability says "Use this item to CAST A FIREBOLT" the question is do you have to do anything to CAST A FIREBOLT. The answer is yes because that is an active ability. It's about time you actually mentioned one.

And yet you are doing the former to the Diablo 2 implementation. You're using the argument that you don't have to do anything to BE ABLE to turn into a werewolf. So, like above, you apply that to Dota and you don't have to do anything to BE ABLE to use the staff of firebolts. If you then go the other way, do you have to do anything to USE the firebolt ability? Yes. Do you have to do anything to USE the werewolf ability? Yes. Thus they are just different implementations of the same thing.

Can we go back to your original argument now? Arguing the implementation of active skills on items isn't going anywhere for either of us. So going back to that which was that the console version is "screwing" the PC version with the only example being provided that Diablo 3 can't have active skills on items because of the existence of the console version. To which I'd go back to a point you made, in that Skyrim includes your definition of active skills. How can Skyrim include active skills when they're too clunky for consoles? And that makes it even less sense when Skyrim was designed with a console being the lead platform (hence why we have that UI which is barely functional on PC).

And I'd also go back to the point I made earlier saying that there isn't any real reason why the current UI couldn't have a couple of minor tweaks to be adapted to it. It would be as simple as adding a new skill category called 'gear' and just have it set up the same as the others but with dynamic icons showing what skills are available from your gear. Then just have them bound to one of the five unrestricted skill slots. And don't go and say you wouldn't want them taking place of main skills because that is just a cop-out for poor design. They should be powerful enough to be a viable choice for your build.

black_knight1337:

Loki_The_Good:
You really should look up for that point its a nice one. Short cutting the ability is exactly what I said yo had to do with active skills. On many games you short cut the ability from the item hence needing to click on it to bind it to a shortcut. You just generally wouldn't want to bind it to your main abilities. for example in skyrim the item active abilities I find useful are generally on my quick bar on a 7 or 8.

Which is what you do with things like Wolfhowl in Diablo 2. You bind the skills from it to one of your function keys or directly to the mouse.

As for your dota example the question isn't do you have to do anything to get the ability to use fireball?" the ability says "Use this item to CAST A FIREBOLT" the question is do you have to do anything to CAST A FIREBOLT. The answer is yes because that is an active ability. It's about time you actually mentioned one.

And yet you are doing the former to the Diablo 2 implementation. You're using the argument that you don't have to do anything to BE ABLE to turn into a werewolf. So, like above, you apply that to Dota and you don't have to do anything to BE ABLE to use the staff of firebolts. If you then go the other way, do you have to do anything to USE the firebolt ability? Yes. Do you have to do anything to USE the werewolf ability? Yes. Thus they are just different implementations of the same thing.

Can we go back to your original argument now? Arguing the implementation of active skills on items isn't going anywhere for either of us. So going back to that which was that the console version is "screwing" the PC version with the only example being provided that Diablo 3 can't have active skills on items because of the existence of the console version. To which I'd go back to a point you made, in that Skyrim includes your definition of active skills. How can Skyrim include active skills when they're too clunky for consoles? And that makes it even less sense when Skyrim was designed with a console being the lead platform (hence why we have that UI which is barely functional on PC).

And I'd also go back to the point I made earlier saying that there isn't any real reason why the current UI couldn't have a couple of minor tweaks to be adapted to it. It would be as simple as adding a new skill category called 'gear' and just have it set up the same as the others but with dynamic icons showing what skills are available from your gear. Then just have them bound to one of the five unrestricted skill slots. And don't go and say you wouldn't want them taking place of main skills because that is just a cop-out for poor design. They should be powerful enough to be a viable choice for your build.

Really your comparing skyrim which uses a rotary analogue quick select to switch between skills and comparing it to diablo which has limited skill slots each bound to separate buttons that are unswitchable and you think your making a legitimate point about controller limitations by saying if one works why can't the other? Also wofhowl passively grants the prerequisites to use a skill it does not grant the skill directly if a game had skills based on stats you wouldn't say +5 str is an actives skill. Well, whatever, they say ignorance is bliss so who am I to take away someones happiness I mean you think diablo 3 is actually good should have been a red flag there. My investment in getting you to understand has expired so enjoy being wrong.

Loki_The_Good:
Really your comparing skyrim which uses a rotary analogue quick select to switch between skills and comparing it to diablo which has limited skill slots each bound to separate buttons that are unswitchable and you think your making a legitimate point about controller limitations by saying if one works why can't the other?

You do realise you were the one that brought up the Skyrim comparison right?

Also wofhowl passively grants the prerequisites to use a skill it does not grant the skill directly if a game had skills based on stats you wouldn't say +5 str is an actives skill.

I shouldn't even have to explain how stupid that comparison is. Wolfhowl's "+3-6 to werewolf" is the same as "Allows the user to transform into a werewolf" or "On use: Transform into a werewolf". There is no difference beyond what the tooltip says. In all of those cases (using charges implementation to verify) the skill that is being granted gets put with the rest of your skills for you to bound to a function key, or a mouse button. And that's the last I'm touching of that line, if you can't understand that then there isn't much point continuing it. I guess you don't know so much about design as you think you do.

I mean you think diablo 3 is actually good should have been a red flag there.

Making a presumption but yes, I do think that Diablo 3 is a good game and with the upcoming changes it could even exceed the legend known as Diablo 2: Lord of Destruction. I know it has it's issues (skill balancing, average at best itemisation) but it is otherwise pretty solid. Most of the rest is purely subjective (sound, art) but there is at least one thing that can't be denied. And that is it's unmatched combat. Seriously, it feels that good that it's actually gone and hurt my enjoyment of other games in the genre because they feel so slow and sluggish in comparison.

And continue to ignore arguments I make that refute your points, or rather point (A whole argument with a single point? Surely you can do better than that). But as you said "they say ignorance is bliss so who am I to take away someones happiness".

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here