So i've been hearing about this alot lately, and I just though I should educate Bombers to how this works... unfortunately its not simple, so give this a read. http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/3811455085

People aren't reading so I will pull some passages:

First up, stats

4. Player choice on stats
Now that we’ve explained the differences between the stats in D2 and D3, let’s look at the way in which you increase their values. D2 allocated a player 5 stat points for every level they acquired. Some quests also rewarded stat points. Gems gave stat points as well. Gems were largely useless as a source of stat modification. The max level gem only gave +10 to a particular stat, and only to helms or armor. Runes may fill in the gap but they weren’t really used for that purpose.
D3 takes stat allocation to a whole new level. A lot of players make the argument that they are losing out on the ability to customize their character, let’s take a look at that. What did we lose? If you look at the gem distribution you’ll note that they all add a significant amount to your stats, all the way from 6-58. You’d only need 10 max level gems to have more control over your base stats than a level 99 character in d2. It’s basically Blizzard saying “okay player, instead of spending 5 per level up to 500 points, we’ll give you items which give (instead of 6 levels worth at end-game D2) 20-40 levels worth of stat points as 1 modifier on an item”. There could be an item in Diablo 3 (or multiple items) that give more stat points than the entire level 2-99 bonus (490 points) COMBINED. Now put some gems into it! Now that’s the polar opposite of a “pretty !@#$ty customization system”. The biggest lesson here is that the higher the numbers go (outside of leveling bonuses), the more control a player has over where to spend them.
Beyond that, the choices for using the stat points are now meaningful. You may note that the end of each section says "this stat is now viable for all classes". It isn’t simply “100 str, 75 dex, 400 vitality, 10 energy”. Now you have to choose, do I want to dish out the damage? Would I rather absorb the damage? Can I just avoid the damage? These are a lot more meaningful choices and they still progress along the same line as leveling. You can also a directly quantifiable return from investing these points. It just might take a little longer to get to the same point in D3 as there’s an item find and gold element to the increase now, instead of a level up curve.
Honestly this translates to a time commitment anyway so the only real question becomes this: Does it take the same amount of time to earn enough money to add 540 points (via gems and crafting) to a character as it did to hit level 99? That’s the real customization question. In all honesty 540 is worth less in Diablo III since the values will go MUCH higher than D2. 540 might need to be compared to 1,000 or even 1,500+ to get an accurate side by side. Beyond those facts, will it be more fun to run something other than Baal in that timeframe?

Or this one, on runes,

The largest controversy of the skill system is the removal of skill points. Players felt that points allowed them to inject their own brand of customization into their character. This was direct opposition to Blizzard customization (the designs of the skills themselves) and allowed a player to decide whether to receive some of the following bonuses: more damage, more duration, less cooldown, higher range, more projectiles. Did you really (as people have said) lose these choices?
If we look at D3 we’ll notice that runes have all the same bonuses. Runes actually add even more choice to the mix! Runes alter damage types, change animations, create secondary effects, and much more. If you were looking for incremental damage gains like skill points, this is another area where the rune system shines! As you leveled in D2 you had to choose what abilities became more powerful. In Diablo 3 the answer is that the character itself becomes more powerful. As you acquire better items and improve your primary stat and weapon damage, all of your abilities follow suit. Now I can use frozen orb and hydra, still getting max damage from both. How cool would it be to play a sorceress that mastered firewall, blizzard, chain lightning, enchant, and static field all at the same time? That sounds pretty darned fun!

Or this one on smithing

4. Player customization improvements
Inherently this change (the addition of crafting) adds a very rewarding objective for those who want their character to feel like they customized it. There aren’t many players who will argue that the D2 crafting system was inherently better. Smithing is the obvious area that improved over the previous iterations (runewords and to a much lesser extent orange items). It should be noted for the player who feels like there is less customization that you now have control over what slot will be filled by an item.
A 10 hour D3 session might yield nothing equippable or even sellable. However it still guarantees that you can go to town, take the materials you earned, and roll 6 different rare shields. When could you ever do that in D2? You might go 10 hours without even seeing a rare shield. It’s not like it would have been useful when you did find it either. In D3 the less effective affixes (looking at you damage taken to mana) have been removed or reworked.

Agreed. It is less customizable. People will not have any reason to make multiple characters of a given class like they did in diablo 2.

Blizzard has Billions of dollars, they dont need you to defend them for free.

It does seem to have a good amount of options. The big difference is that you can completely switch them around at any time with no penalty. I know some people live having to commit to their choices, but I'm into this new system.

who cares, I'm still gonna play it and enjoy it (hopefully) regardless of what I can't or can do

Buying Torchlight II, so built in gold farming, constant online, lack of mods (you will be banned) is not a problem.

It's ok, don't let the internet idiots get you down. Let them be wrong.

I'm going to break rule #1 of Napalm's rules for internet discourse and say that you need to chill out.

Yeah, that little FAQ doesn't take into account all the gems and socketed weapons, runes, charms, and skill synergies that existed in Diablo II. Put quite simply you always wanted to go back with each Patch in Diablo II to make a better character build. There's no need for that anymore in Diablo III, no hard decisions to make that you nervous about messing up, and then ecstatic when the build finally comes together. I'll still end up buying it to see how the story pans out since I'm so invested in the fiction... but hey, it's not even the same people developing that series anymore, and even the tone seems to be taking the game as a joke. Your loved ones are coming back to life to serve hell, and people are just making smart ass remarks about "Well, it's our fault for calling this place New Tristram". Still, holding up hope here that I'm wrong and it all comes together at the end.

Torchlight 2 is better.

@ReyGitano said:

Yeah, that little FAQ doesn't take into account all the gems and socketed weapons, runes, charms, and skill synergies that existed in Diablo II. Put quite simply you always wanted to go back with each Patch in Diablo II to make a better character build. There's no need for that anymore in Diablo III, no hard decisions to make that you nervous about messing up, and then ecstatic when the build finally comes together. I'll still end up buying it to see how the story pans out since I'm so invested in the fiction... but hey, it's not even the same people developing that series anymore, and even the tone seems to be taking the game as a joke. Your loved ones are coming back to life to serve hell, and people are just making smart ass remarks about "Well, it's our fault for calling this place New Tristram". Still, holding up hope here that I'm wrong and it all comes together at the end.

@Phatmac said:

Torchlight 2 is better.

At first glance, I was going to say, "You went from that thought-out post to this nonsense?"

I'm not really digging the game. No runes, gems, charms, attributes, skill synergies or rune words makes me :(

Also, the voice acting, apart from Deckard Cain, is really bad. The bit with the blacksmith and his wife, in particular, is cringe-worthy and honestly kinda embarrassing. I thought about at least trying out all the classes, but after 5 hours of sporadic play, I am already burnt out on this game. In fact, I think the beta has put me off from buying it altogether, which is kinda crazy when you consider the hundreds of hours I've sunk into LoD.

Maybe I'll check it out if and when it gets a 50% price cut.

I've been in the beta a while, have been super disappointed in it for a while. Hell, they've even removed layers of player agency and customization throughout my beta experience. Aside from that, I think the narrative and linearity (in the beta content) stands directly opposed to what Diablo is supposed to be about: killing stuff, exploring, leveling up, and dying. Blizzard is doing a fantastic job making a well-polished game that has, in my opinion, jarring design philosophy issues. Working within these constraints, they've done a spectacular job creating a modern Diablo game, but those constraints are ultimately what ruins the experience.

And I swear, if I continue to advertise Path of Exile, I should probably get paid for it. But for anyone looking for a spectacular, evolutionary spiritual-sequel to Diablo 2 that doesn't bow down to the masses, strips the experience to the core, and takes the genre forward in some monumental ways: go ahead and sign up for the beta. It's fucking fantastic and overwhelming in all the best ways.

I've been in the beta a while, have been super disappointed in it for a while. Hell, they've even removed layers of player agency and customization throughout my beta experience. Aside from that, I think the narrative and linearity (in the beta content) stands directly opposed to what Diablo is supposed to be about: killing stuff, exploring, leveling up, and dying. Blizzard is doing a fantastic job making a well-polished game that has, in my opinion, jarring design philosophy issues. Working within these constraints, they've done a spectacular job creating a modern Diablo game, but those constraints are ultimately what ruins the experience.

And I swear, if I continue to advertise Path of Exile, I should probably get paid for it. But for anyone looking for a spectacular, evolutionary spiritual-sequel to Diablo 2 that doesn't bow down to the masses, strips the experience to the core, and takes the genre forward in some monumental ways: go ahead and sign up for the beta. It's fucking fantastic and overwhelming in all the best ways.

Didn't play Diablo 2. Nor any of the other current and upcoming contenders to the genre throne. Played a bit of Titan Quest, which didn't manage to grab my attention past my first couple of sessions with it.

With that out of the way - from what I've seen, Diablo 3 allows for an insane amount of customization and 'skill alchemy' - with lots of viable builds to play around with. As somebody who doesn't plan to stick with Diablo 3 forever, I do welcome the freeform character building. Hell, I hated the rigid characters in WoW - until we got dualspecc, players were way too commited to one playstyle. I certainly do not prefer absolutely rigid talentbuilds over freefrom customization. Fun is about gameplay. Rigid builds is about avoiding to fail. Where's the fun gameplay in that? Unless googling and trolling class forums is your idea of fun gameplay.

Much of the complaints of longtime fans sound to me like 'I don't care if the moment to moment gameplay is just as rich or richer - I DEMAND OLD SCHOOL TEDIUM.' I get how designing tedium 'just so' is the salt in the figurative videogame soup, but really, all I need is a tiny pinch of tedium. Rigid characters would be way too much of that for me.

@The_Laughing_Man: I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. But Path of Exile is an MMO of sorts. You'll walk into a town and see all sorts of other players running around, you can invite them if you want. Then when you go out into the world, it instances everything for you and your party. If you've ever played the original Guild Wars, it's very similar in it's design.

*Edit: I'll clarify that if you want to play the game as a singleplayer experience, there's nothing stopping you. All the content scales to your level/party size when it 'generates' the field/cave/area/castle/whatever. If you want to run around as a summoning-happy witch with 17 minions (I think that's the number I'm at now... 8 skeletons, 6 zombies, 3 spirits... yup, that math checks out) with a crazy berserker, stompy hammer friend of yours... the experience will accommodate your party setup as much as it accommodates whatever insane playstyle you want (I love specializing my way into corpse explosions--skeletons pop so nicely, especially when you got so many of 'em :D).

@Seppli: I'm actually not a fan of the original Diablo games (tried to go back and play them for the first time and were simply too dated for me, but I loved Torchlight and Titan Quest). And I'll say that the restrictive systems in Diablo III are unnerving. Initially (when I got into the beta) you could equip any six (I believe) skills that you wanted. Now, you're forced to choose between very specific sets of attacks: one CC, one defense, etc. (class-dependent). What if I wanted to roll with a particularly offensive character? Or a character who had more than one AoE skill? I was dumbfounded by how limiting the system was prior to the change, but now it's almost appalling. I'll continue to contextualize by saying that I got into the Path of Exile beta about 2 days earlier than my Diablo 3 invite (lucky me, I know), so I had already blown myself away with choice. It just felt like a really limited, simplistic, polished, narrative-driven casual-gamer focused (insofar as it was quickly digestible, not necessarily 'easy') sequel to Diablo 2.

However, when you give players the choice between any hundreds of skills, hundreds of skill modifiers that level up and can be applied in copious ways, a talent tree the size of a forest, and ZERO restrictions on your ability to 'design' your character (all classes can use all equipment, all classes can build in any direction, all classes can use all skills [provided they 'build' to accommodate the equipment/skill stat requirement]), you end up with a game that is overwhelming in all the best ways.

But sure. Diablo 3 will probably be fun from start to finish. And I'll never want to play it again; from what I gather, this notion of playing through a Diablo game like a singleplayer adventure spits on everything that Diablo stood for. I mean, people still play Diablo 2 to this very day--religiously! You think that's due to compelling narrative? Lets be serious for a second, the voice acting is terrible, and the story seems très dull and predictable. But you're forced constantly push it out of your face throughout the entire beta (either by patiently listening to the awful dialogue, or by mashing on the little [x] to make it go away). This isn't what makes action RPGs compelling; I mean, how much story was in Torchlight? Enough to tell you to keep on digging, then it got out of your way. At least those developers know what they're doing, apparently.

I'll stop ranting before I get incoherent... if I'm not incoherent already.

@project343 said:

And I'll say that the restrictive systems in Diablo III are unnerving. Initially (when I got into the beta) you could equip any six (I believe) skills that you wanted. Now, you're forced to choose between very specific sets of attacks: one CC, one defense, etc. (class-dependent).

I have yet to try the beta after they made those major changes, I may have to re-install it. I was already kind of bummed with how skills were handled back then, this may make me even more sad.

@WilltheMagicAsian said:

@project343 said:

And I'll say that the restrictive systems in Diablo III are unnerving. Initially (when I got into the beta) you could equip any six (I believe) skills that you wanted. Now, you're forced to choose between very specific sets of attacks: one CC, one defense, etc. (class-dependent).

I have yet to try the beta after they made those major changes, I may have to re-install it. I was already kind of bummed with how skills were handled back then, this may make me even more sad.

You can still put any 6 skills anywhere.

Edit: The Diablo 3 skill system in summary is.

Each class has 22-25 active skills.

Each skill can be runed one of five ways.

You can use any 6 at one time.

@Adamsons said:

@WilltheMagicAsian said:

@project343 said:

And I'll say that the restrictive systems in Diablo III are unnerving. Initially (when I got into the beta) you could equip any six (I believe) skills that you wanted. Now, you're forced to choose between very specific sets of attacks: one CC, one defense, etc. (class-dependent).

I have yet to try the beta after they made those major changes, I may have to re-install it. I was already kind of bummed with how skills were handled back then, this may make me even more sad.

You can still put any 6 skills anywhere.

Did they change it again? I played it several months ago. They slowly unlocked slots and skills. Had to decide which of the 20-odd skills you wanted to fit into the 6 slots (closer to 4 with the beta's level restriction).

After the change, all the skills in the game were grouped into particular niches. You had a defense skill, a healing skill, an AoE skill, a long cooldown skill, etc. (I'm making these up, they were class-specific). Your 1 key effectively became a defense skill, right click as a resource-consuming skill. Each category had between 3-5 skills to choose from to fill that slot. It removed your ability from nabbing two defense-oriented skills. This change was made... a month ago? Maybe. I haven't played the "open" beta because I'm sure there's all sorts of dandy connection issues. Have they gone back on this change?

Here's the blog post where Blizzard discuss the changes and explain them in-depth.

Is this the last time? Oh man, I want to get a word in before the chance is gone forever.

Damn it! Now I forgot what I wanted to say!

@project343 said:

@Adamsons said:

@WilltheMagicAsian said:

@project343 said:

And I'll say that the restrictive systems in Diablo III are unnerving. Initially (when I got into the beta) you could equip any six (I believe) skills that you wanted. Now, you're forced to choose between very specific sets of attacks: one CC, one defense, etc. (class-dependent).

I have yet to try the beta after they made those major changes, I may have to re-install it. I was already kind of bummed with how skills were handled back then, this may make me even more sad.

You can still put any 6 skills anywhere.

Did they change it again? I played it several months ago. They slowly unlocked slots and skills. Had to decide which of the 20-odd skills you wanted to fit into the 6 slots (closer to 4 with the beta's level restriction).

After the change, all the skills in the game were grouped into particular niches. You had a defense skill, a healing skill, an AoE skill, a long cooldown skill, etc. (I'm making these up, they were class-specific). Your 1 key effectively became a defense skill, right click as a resource-consuming skill. Each category had between 3-5 skills to choose from to fill that slot. It removed your ability from nabbing two defense-oriented skills. This change was made... a month ago? Maybe. I haven't played the "open" beta because I'm sure there's all sorts of dandy connection issues. Have they gone back on this change?

You have to toggle an option for "elective mode" with the UI changes, but can still put any skill in any slot and have been able to since the change.

Edit: I don't think it is particularly well telegraphed, which is a shame really. I can imagine it would give a lot of people who are unaware this impression.

@project343 said:

I've been in the beta a while, have been super disappointed in it for a while. Hell, they've even removed layers of player agency and customization throughout my beta experience. Aside from that, I think the narrative and linearity (in the beta content) stands directly opposed to what Diablo is supposed to be about: killing stuff, exploring, leveling up, and dying. Blizzard is doing a fantastic job making a well-polished game that has, in my opinion, jarring design philosophy issues. Working within these constraints, they've done a spectacular job creating a modern Diablo game, but those constraints are ultimately what ruins the experience.

And I swear, if I continue to advertise Path of Exile, I should probably get paid for it. But for anyone looking for a spectacular, evolutionary spiritual-sequel to Diablo 2 that doesn't bow down to the masses, strips the experience to the core, and takes the genre forward in some monumental ways: go ahead and sign up for the beta. It's fucking fantastic and overwhelming in all the best ways.

I downloaded Path of Exile today and it's great, I really like the the skill system. I'm only level 9 but so far it's the best Diablo-clone I have ever played.

@ez123 said:

@ReyGitano said:

Yeah, that little FAQ doesn't take into account all the gems and socketed weapons, runes, charms, and skill synergies that existed in Diablo II. Put quite simply you always wanted to go back with each Patch in Diablo II to make a better character build. There's no need for that anymore in Diablo III, no hard decisions to make that you nervous about messing up, and then ecstatic when the build finally comes together. I'll still end up buying it to see how the story pans out since I'm so invested in the fiction... but hey, it's not even the same people developing that series anymore, and even the tone seems to be taking the game as a joke. Your loved ones are coming back to life to serve hell, and people are just making smart ass remarks about "Well, it's our fault for calling this place New Tristram". Still, holding up hope here that I'm wrong and it all comes together at the end.

@Phatmac said:

Torchlight 2 is better.

At first glance, I was going to say, "You went from that thought-out post to this nonsense?"

You stop posting regularly on the forums for a few months and someone jacks your avatar. Damn identity thieves.

@Adamsons: Oh, well fuck. Good for them. At least they're giving the option to go back to the less restrictive system. Well, I take any comments I made about that restrictive system back. Like I said though, the original system itself did seem a bit limited. I mean, 6 skills seems pretty light. I completely understand forcibly restricting the number of active combat skills, but 6 is maybe a little too few. And I just don't think that the glyphs substitute entirely for talent trees, stat allocation, or what have you. I mean, they're varied, well-designed, and certainly have a rewarding visual variety to them... but compared to other games in this genre, I just wish there was maybe an additional layer of complexity to your character customization.

I'm also a bit peed that the item-class restrictions are as rigid as they are. But that's a nit-pick.

@gike987: Fantastic to hear! The game gets all manner of unbelievable. It just reeks of such brilliant design philosophy that it gives me the impression that they are well-studied game design academics with grand aspirations. Their overhaul to the traditional MMO/RPG economy is absolutely inspired. And their gem/skill system is wonderful.

The game deserves a lot more attention than it's getting.

I completely agree with Blizzard with the methods they've used to remove "bad player traps" from Diablo. I'm not losing any sleep because I can't waste four talent points in Poison Creeper.

@ReyGitano said:

@ez123 said:

@ReyGitano said:

Yeah, that little FAQ doesn't take into account all the gems and socketed weapons, runes, charms, and skill synergies that existed in Diablo II. Put quite simply you always wanted to go back with each Patch in Diablo II to make a better character build. There's no need for that anymore in Diablo III, no hard decisions to make that you nervous about messing up, and then ecstatic when the build finally comes together. I'll still end up buying it to see how the story pans out since I'm so invested in the fiction... but hey, it's not even the same people developing that series anymore, and even the tone seems to be taking the game as a joke. Your loved ones are coming back to life to serve hell, and people are just making smart ass remarks about "Well, it's our fault for calling this place New Tristram". Still, holding up hope here that I'm wrong and it all comes together at the end.

@Phatmac said:

Torchlight 2 is better.

At first glance, I was going to say, "You went from that thought-out post to this nonsense?"

You stop posting regularly on the forums for a few months and someone jacks your avatar. Damn identity thieves.

I totally thought you guys were the same user as well.

@project343 said:

@The_Laughing_Man: I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. But Path of Exile is an MMO of sorts. You'll walk into a town and see all sorts of other players running around, you can invite them if you want. Then when you go out into the world, it instances everything for you and your party. If you've ever played the original Guild Wars, it's very similar in it's design.

*Edit: I'll clarify that if you want to play the game as a singleplayer experience, there's nothing stopping you. All the content scales to your level/party size when it 'generates' the field/cave/area/castle/whatever. If you want to run around as a summoning-happy witch with 17 minions (I think that's the number I'm at now... 8 skeletons, 6 zombies, 3 spirits... yup, that math checks out) with a crazy berserker, stompy hammer friend of yours... the experience will accommodate your party setup as much as it accommodates whatever insane playstyle you want (I love specializing my way into corpse explosions--skeletons pop so nicely, especially when you got so many of 'em :D).

@Seppli: I'm actually not a fan of the original Diablo games (tried to go back and play them for the first time and were simply too dated for me, but I loved Torchlight and Titan Quest). And I'll say that the restrictive systems in Diablo III are unnerving. Initially (when I got into the beta) you could equip any six (I believe) skills that you wanted. Now, you're forced to choose between very specific sets of attacks: one CC, one defense, etc. (class-dependent). What if I wanted to roll with a particularly offensive character? Or a character who had more than one AoE skill? I was dumbfounded by how limiting the system was prior to the change, but now it's almost appalling. I'll continue to contextualize by saying that I got into the Path of Exile beta about 2 days earlier than my Diablo 3 invite (lucky me, I know), so I had already blown myself away with choice. It just felt like a really limited, simplistic, polished, narrative-driven casual-gamer focused (insofar as it was quickly digestible, not necessarily 'easy') sequel to Diablo 2.

However, when you give players the choice between any hundreds of skills, hundreds of skill modifiers that level up and can be applied in copious ways, a talent tree the size of a forest, and ZERO restrictions on your ability to 'design' your character (all classes can use all equipment, all classes can build in any direction, all classes can use all skills [provided they 'build' to accommodate the equipment/skill stat requirement]), you end up with a game that is overwhelming in all the best ways.

But sure. Diablo 3 will probably be fun from start to finish. And I'll never want to play it again; from what I gather, this notion of playing through a Diablo game like a singleplayer adventure spits on everything that Diablo stood for. I mean, people still play Diablo 2 to this very day--religiously! You think that's due to compelling narrative? Lets be serious for a second, the voice acting is terrible, and the story seems très dull and predictable. But you're forced constantly push it out of your face throughout the entire beta (either by patiently listening to the awful dialogue, or by mashing on the little [x] to make it go away). This isn't what makes action RPGs compelling; I mean, how much story was in Torchlight? Enough to tell you to keep on digging, then it got out of your way. At least those developers know what they're doing, apparently.

I'll stop ranting before I get incoherent... if I'm not incoherent already.

the shitty thing about that massive tree is that... its easy to make mistakes... and what if you change your mind? Actually the even shittier thing compared to Diablo is that I guarantee you in 2-3 months times, somebody would have found the 2-3 best builds and that will be what everyone will be doing. That won't happen with Diablo, all builds will be viable... also its not REALLY restriced in that offensive/ defensive crap, although it appears that way they more or less all have damage abilities and you really can pick full offensive or full aoe abilities.

@ReyGitano: Yes, clearly didn't swipe this from the Persona 3 Protagonist Giantbomb page. I am a sneaky identify theif!

@Supermarius said:

Agreed. It is less customizable. People will not have any reason to make multiple characters of a given class like they did in diablo 2.

This. I can just change skills on the fly. I'm still going to play the shit out of it though.

@StarvingGamer said:

@ReyGitano Actually that little FAQ directly addresses runes, gems, sockets, skill synergies, rune words etc and draws clear mathematical comparisons to show how the level of customization has been broadened, not diminished. I will grant you that charms were not mentioned.

charms were a ridiculous paradox... the more you have the less loot you can have... its kind of stupid for the optimal build to be a character who can't carry anything... you shouldn't encourage players to be stronger by increasing their trips to town for basically every item they find... its like... do I want to have a strong character or do I want to have fun?

@Lukeweizer said:

@Supermarius said:

Agreed. It is less customizable. People will not have any reason to make multiple characters of a given class like they did in diablo 2.

This. I can just change skills on the fly. I'm still going to play the shit out of it though.

D2 - ~12 viable builds across all classes with 2-3 best-in-slot items used across all classes

D3 - ~12 viable builds per class with specific optimal itemizations on a per build basis, modified by player preference

@StarvingGamer said:

@Lukeweizer said:

@Supermarius said:

Agreed. It is less customizable. People will not have any reason to make multiple characters of a given class like they did in diablo 2.

This. I can just change skills on the fly. I'm still going to play the shit out of it though.

D2 - ~12 viable builds across all classes with 2-3 best-in-slot items used across all classes

D3 - ~12 viable builds per class with specific optimal itemizations on a per build basis, modified by player preference

You're assuming that there will actually be 12 viable builds in Diablo 3 to clear hell, but we won't know that until the game is out. For all we know right now there might only be a handful, or one that's so overpowered that it overwhelms the rest.

@gamefreak9 said:

@StarvingGamer said:

@ReyGitano Actually that little FAQ directly addresses runes, gems, sockets, skill synergies, rune words etc and draws clear mathematical comparisons to show how the level of customization has been broadened, not diminished. I will grant you that charms were not mentioned.

charms were a ridiculous paradox... the more you have the less loot you can have... its kind of stupid for the optimal build to be a character who can't carry anything... you shouldn't encourage players to be stronger by increasing their trips to town for basically every item they find... its like... do I want to have a strong character or do I want to have fun?

I played a lot of Diablo II. The game quickly reaches a point where money is worthless and you only pick up loot you really need, and then store it in your stash. I never encountered a situation where I was choosing between charms I really wanted and loot I had to carry back. I can only see that being a problem if people are ridiculous with their charms to the point that they don't even have room to carry a breastplate around anymore.

@project343 said:

@Adamsons: I mean, 6 skills seems pretty light. I completely understand forcibly restricting the number of active combat skills, but 6 is maybe a little too few.

Lets be honest here though lol, who was really using more than 2 or 3 skills at a time in D2 anyway?

Also, am I the only one who misses the slow pace of the original Diablo? I liked trodding my way through the dungeons as a warrior with only my sword and nothing else. Diablo 2 and 3 are much more alike than the first game is with either of them. I feel like there's way too many abilities and too much stuff going on in D2 and D3. I just want to crack some demons in the head with a mace, and watch their bodies hit the floor, not watch a fireworks display.

That being said I'm still super excited for D3.

No custom hairstyles, no sale!

@WilltheMagicAsian said:

@project343 said:

And I'll say that the restrictive systems in Diablo III are unnerving. Initially (when I got into the beta) you could equip any six (I believe) skills that you wanted. Now, you're forced to choose between very specific sets of attacks: one CC, one defense, etc. (class-dependent).

I have yet to try the beta after they made those major changes, I may have to re-install it. I was already kind of bummed with how skills were handled back then, this may make me even more sad.

There's an option under 'Gameplay'. Elective mode. You can mix and match any 6 active skills as you please. The way the skills are presented is only an optional noobcrutch.

@gamefreak9: But is performance really much of an issue in these Diablo-styled games? There's no high-end, performance-based raiding. There's not much of an emphasis on PVP. So the question is: what's the point of cookie-cutter builds? As long as you aren't derping with the skill tree, the game will do a pretty good job accommodating your playstyle. And the size of the tree ensures that there's plenty of variety (combined with whatever skill and modifier gems you slot into your armor).

Yep. It sure feels like it to me. Plenty of skills and abilities to experiment with, but without all the commitment and regret about dropping points in the wrong tree.

It's a different game. I can understand how some would be annoyed by the changes that have taken place, but I'd hold your horses until the game comes out. Appearances can be deceptive, and the Beta is very, very short.

Will Diablo 3 be simpler than Diablo 2? Yeah, probably. Will it suffer for it? Not necessarily, but I can understand the concern.

It's also good to remember than many of Diablo 2's mechanics were broken and a lot of the "complexity" came from poorly explained stats and items. It wasn't exactly "complex" - it was "confusing" and required a lot of time in order to understand the mechanics.

And I'm actually glad if it's a little streamlined, a little simplified. I'm a busy guy - I can't spend 12 hours a day playing the game, or going through forum posts or starting new characters every time I want to experiment with something. A lot of D2 fans now have jobs and families. The game came out over a decade ago guys. Many of the people who played it back in 2000 are in their late twenties, early thirties. We've left college, or we're studying for post-graduate degrees. We've got no time to spend 50+ hours a week playing the game. I'm glad they streamlined it for those of us who have busy lives.

@ReyGitano said:

@StarvingGamer said:

@Lukeweizer said:

@Supermarius said:

Agreed. It is less customizable. People will not have any reason to make multiple characters of a given class like they did in diablo 2.

This. I can just change skills on the fly. I'm still going to play the shit out of it though.

D2 - ~12 viable builds across all classes with 2-3 best-in-slot items used across all classes

D3 - ~12 viable builds per class with specific optimal itemizations on a per build basis, modified by player preference

You're assuming that there will actually be 12 viable builds in Diablo 3 to clear hell, but we won't know that until the game is out. For all we know right now there might only be a handful, or one that's so overpowered that it overwhelms the rest.

Actually its not an assumption at all, because they use weapon damage % as a baseline for their testing, they don't need to test builds with different loot, its a SURE thing that the builds are viable.

@project343 said:

@gamefreak9: But is performance really much of an issue in these Diablo-styled games? There's no high-end, performance-based raiding. There's not much of an emphasis on PVP. So the question is: what's the point of cookie-cutter builds? As long as you aren't derping with the skill tree, the game will do a pretty good job accommodating your playstyle. And the size of the tree ensures that there's plenty of variety (combined with whatever skill and modifier gems you slot into your armor).

well I don't know how relevant it is, but i'm personally a competitive person, even when its not pvp, I shiver at the thought that another build might be better than mine in EVERY situation.

Of course the Diablo 3 is much, much better, that's fact.

But the people who complain don't even want to try to think about it. It's different to Diablo 2 which already makes a lot people, well actually the stupid, vocal minority, hate it for no other purpose.

And people like TotalBiscuit, someone who doesn't know shit about the genre or games either, keep telling their half a million subscriber base that the game is dumbed down for consoles. Why? Who knows, maybe he's just ignorant about that genre and dislikes Blizzard, maybe he wants to promote his baby Torchlight (he's friends with Max Schaefer), who can tell. But there are so many peoples with a big subscriber base who keep telling people about stuff they know shit about.

Now the angry vocal minority who loves that crap, goes on every forum and posts about this and it seems like most users think that the game is bad.

But truth be told the vast majority of players, especially the ones actually playing Diablo 2 and co, like the changes very much. So @ OP, don't get too worked up about it. Shortly after release the haters will be lost in silence and nobody even gives a fuck about the "oh so much better other titles" like Torchlight, Path of Exiles, Grim's Dawn etc., you name it. The better game will prevail and just because some percentage is ignorant to see the vast advantages of Diablo 3's systems nothing will change.

The thread you linked has a very nice, in depths analysis. Unfortunately people won't bother reading it, if it doesn't reflect their own opinion ;P

I would say that it is less customisable imo but i don't believe that is a bad thing, it means you get a better game experience and can really experiment with different combinations of skills rather then choose a few and focus on those as you had to in Diablo 2. But 2 had that ability to customise more it just wasn't really viable.

@blaze503 said:

I would say that it is less customisable imo but i don't believe that is a bad thing, it means you get a better game experience and can really experiment with different combinations of skills rather then choose a few and focus on those as you had to in Diablo 2. But 2 had that ability to customise more it just wasn't really viable.

its like people don't even read anything I posted... its not an opinion... in D3 you have MUCH more control over how your character is built. people get confused because there are LESS ways to customize your character but the ways that their are actually make MORE of a difference.

@NaDannMaGoGo said:

Of course the Diablo 3 is much, much better, that's fact.

Now I don't really have a preference about D2 / D3 but you are just fucking dumb.

How cool would it be to play a sorceress that mastered firewall, blizzard, chain lightning, enchant, and static field all at the same time? That sounds pretty darned fun!

That's not cool at all. It means you don't have to think about where to spend your points in order to get a decent character, but you'll be a killing machine no matter what you do.

@toshi0815 said:

How cool would it be to play a sorceress that mastered firewall, blizzard, chain lightning, enchant, and static field all at the same time? That sounds pretty darned fun!

That's not cool at all. It means you don't have to think about where to spend your points in order to get a decent character, but you'll be a killing machine no matter what you do.

No it doesn't. It just means you won't end up with a completely worthless character because you didn't look up a FAQ online to tell you the two exact ways you have to spend every single stat/skill point for your class.

I never really played much of D2, so I don't really know a lot about it. I was playing D3 with a friend a few days ago and said the same thing. Had no idea so many other people felt the same. It seems like a shame that you can't make a tank, and someone else is a DPS character etc unless the game tells you that you can build that way.

@Azteck said:

I never really played much of D2, so I don't really know a lot about it. I was playing D3 with a friend a few days ago and said the same thing. Had no idea so many other people felt the same. It seems like a shame that you can't make a tank, and someone else is a DPS character etc unless the game tells you that you can build that way.

What? Well first off Diablo 3 doesn't follow an MMORPG class structure but you can totally build your character to be more Tanky or DPS or CC or even Healerish depending on your class.