But it doesn’t matter, because it’s not subjective either. Either one system requires more cognitive effort, or it doesn’t. People may have different opinions about which is which, but only one such opinion can be correct, since cognitive effort is measurable.
Anyway, it is very strange for you to be telling me to “chill out” rather than cubs fan. There is no doubt that s/he is by far the strident voice in this discussion.
That stands to reason–we’re talking about a video game.
In D3, you will not be able to progress past certain fights until you figure out a creative strategy or equipment load to take care of it. And as far as I know, there is no such thing in D2 as a character build that doesn’t depend at all on strategy or equipment load. (Correct me if I’m wrong though–but note that if I’m wrong, this counts as a point in favor of D3, not D2, on the “dumbed down” scale.)
D2 and D3, then, do not differ on this point either. (Or if they do, then D2 comes out the worse for the comparison.)
TBH, skill-swapping is one of the things I’ve always found somewhat immersion-breaking in these games. Choosing which equipment to take into battle in a more modern-day game (because there’s a limit to how much you can carry) makes sense to me: “Let’s see, I believe that this situation calls for an assault rifle, a rocket launcher, and hand grenades.”
But when your attacks are all learned skills that you carry in your brain, and can all be executed while wielding the same weapon … the idea of choosing X number of the things you know how to do and then limiting yourself to those specific attacks during a battle never really washed with me. But I go with it because, hey, game mechanics. And I did get 5+ years of enjoyment out of D2.
agreed. sinking hours and hours just to try a particular build (and then abandoning it) is just crazy. in D2, i would spend alot of time mulling over character builds, just staring at the skill tree (and not playing!), not quite willing to put in the points yet. now, i find myself constantly tweaking the skill selection for the combo i like best while i play. i’ve even tried and abandoned combos for later, till i have the equipment to support it. (melee sorc!)
to get more information on your skills, turn on Advanced Tooltips.
to freely configure your skills, turn on Elective Mode.
First, shijinn, thanks for the “advanced tooltips” trick–I’ll do it as soon as I play next!
I was thinking about it earlier today, and putting it in D&D Third Edition terms.
Diablo 2 lets you play a sorcerer. Diablo 3 lets you play a cleric.
Sorcerers in D&D get a very few spells, and then they can cast the bejesus out of them. You have to choose your spells very carefully, because you’re stuck with them. Your bad choice at level 1 will haunt you at level 20 (a little bit).
Clerics can cast fewer spells on any day, but they have a tremendous choice of spells to prepare for that day. On any given day, a cleric can choose to be a healer extraordinaire, a buffer, a debuffer, or even a front-line fighter.
I vastly prefer playing clerics in D&D.
And I think that corresponds reasonably well to D2 vs. D3. D2 gives you a few skills that you’ll use the bejesus out of, but you better choose those skills carefully. D3 gives you a lot of skills, but you have access to a smaller array of skills at any given time, but you can change that array as necessary. I prefer the latter arrangement.
Others clearly differ, and that’s cool. The idea of “dumbing down skills,” though, is hackle-raising.
As for being able to change skills, I think it can be visualized. Different spells require different components; different axe-swings require you to hold the axe differently (maybe adding a loop to the end of the axe or locking the haft to your gauntlet or something); different traps require different preparation. You have a few things ready to go mid-fight; if you want to have other things ready to go mid-fight, it takes a moment or so to get them prepped and to get your old ones safely stashed.
No, you really don’t. In D2, I’d have more than a dozen skills at usable levels to switch between. And they’d each be at whatever level I thought was the best use of resources. You may not value that part of the game, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there.
And what is the unit of measurement for cognitive effort? Are all brains identically organized, then, so that all tasks that require more effort for person A require more effort for person B? The answer would be ‘No.’
No doubt in your mind.
Annnnd now you’re willfully missing the point. We’re done.
As soon as I can switch between them in D3 via hotkey with no cooldown, then you might have a case, even though they still wouldn’t have the character building aspect that I enjoy.
So I just got to Act III, and I’m feeling a bit better about the skill system. I’ve identified the skills I want to use and don’t feel the need to switch anymore. Originally, I was switching between Frenzy for bosses and Cleave for mobs, and constantly switching felt lame. But now I’ve got a good setup I like and probably won’t deviate from unless I find another spell I really like.
Still, I think the reason the skill system feels “wrong” to a D2 veteran is that, for me at least, the reason I kept playing D2 over and over was because of the fun of “building characters”. Decide what I wanted to be beforehand and build it. Frenzy Barb. Poison Nova Necro. Melee Sorc. Etc. The joy was finally getting that main skill to level up or find that piece of equipment that was core to your build. In D3 I don’t feel like I’m “building” a character - I’ll just level up each class once and then be able to switch their builds around whenever I feel like it. Somehow the lack of permanence creates dissonance in my head.
To be fair, as a single player in D2, if I made a leveling mistake, yes I could create a new character, but it took several hours to level back up to where I was when I made the mistake. So it wasn’t so much an oops button as lose-three-hours-of-your-life button. From what folks are saying about D3 re-specing, it doesn’t seem comparable.
This is ludicrous. I have not willfully missed any point whatsoever. I have written only calm and rational posts in the face of insulting language from you and others–yet I am called “strident.” I am informed by someone who does not know the difference between relativity and subjectivity that he is entitled to answer my pointing this out with a single off-hand “nope.” If anyone is entitled to rudely break off the conversation, it would be me.
Correct. I am trying to show that what is at issue isn’t the complexity or “dumbness” of the two systems, but rather, how many hours of ones life one is willing to spend on a game. It’s a clever rhetorical ploy–if you liked D2 better, I am attempting to imply without actually saying it, you have less of a life than I do.
The two games are equally complex and interesting. The complexity and interest in D3 has been shaped such that one need not waste hours or days of one’s life to make it pay off. That is win win. If you want to waste hours or days of your life for a payoff in a game, that’s fine, but I can’t see how you can think this in any way a personality trait which justifies complaint. It sounds like a personal problem rather than something any gaming company should cater to or any of us other players should feel bad for you about.
Is this insulting? Perhaps, but it is insulting (and moreover, false!) to be told that I enjoy a “dumbed down game.”
Fair enough. If that’s the part of the game that’s most important to you, then D3 may not be the game for you, just as D2 was not the game for people who most valued finding new spells as drops in D1. It’s a different play-style, definitely, and I for one am glad they created a new game instead of just updating the graphics of the old one; I like the more tactical approach of this game.
