The devs did not ruin diablo 3

"

j33bus wrote:

One of the big problems with that is the always online part these ARPGs want to have. If you want really fancy movement you don't get that, think of the desyncing. I remember thinking, "Well I can never do Atziri because if I desync I'm dead."

Sure you can do lockstep like PoE, but then you're gonna make your game unplayable for anyone not near a server.

It depends what you mean by "always online." For single-player always-online situations, no, it doesn't necessarily mean desync. There is, however, a trade-off: preventing desync opens a door to predictive hacking.

Let me explain. There are two types of netcode designs: informing, and confirming.

An informing system keeps the client in the dark until the last possible second for instance:
1. You use an identification scroll on a rare item. Your client sends that action over the internet to the server.
2. Your client does not have the information by itself to predict what stats that rare weapon will have — which means no hack could let you figure out those stats before identifying it. Your client is forced to wait on the server for that information.
3. After the server receives the ID scroll command, it informs the client of the item's stats.
4. After it (finally!) receives the information from the server, the client displays the item stats.

A confirming system, in contrast, equips the client with the ability to figure things out on its own. For instance:
0. The server and client establish the same RNG seeds (actually pseudorandom and fully deterministic under the hood).
1. You order your character to attack an enemy. Your client sends that action over the internet to the server.
2. Your client has the information to determine how much damage that attack will deal — which means a hack could let you figure out that damage before attacking. Your client doesn't need to wait for information from the server and can display the effects of the damage (e.g. enemy death, enemy stun) immediately.
3. Upon receiving action information, the server confirms that the resulting attack did a particular amount of damage, killed or didn't kill an enemy, etc.
4. The client receives the confirmation and checks it against its own result.

This is mix and match. For instance, you could use both the informing system for rare items AND the confirmation system for combat damage. And GGG have used both systems in the past: the vast majority informing, but map data was confirming (hence the illicit use of "maphack" programs).

For the most part, PoE has desync because GGG'S theory on clients is they’re like mushrooms: feed ’em shit (one tiny morsel at a time) and keep ’em in the dark.

I guess you can go the torchlight route and be online, but decide that cheating doesn't matter. You really can't do anything to prevent it once the client side knows too much.

"

j33bus wrote:

I guess you can go the torchlight route and be online, but decide that cheating doesn't matter. You really can't do anything to prevent it once the client side knows too much.

Don't be superstitious. With the "confirm system" I described, the only game that persists is stored safely on the servers, and only accepts inputs (mouse clicks, etc) to alter it. The only cheating inherently possible under a "confirm system" is knowledge-related — that is, players seeing things before they're supposed to see them.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

(I guess one can manage a similar control scheme on PC using arrow-key or WASD movement, but let's face it, PC gaming is on its way out.)

Not sure about that one. If anything PC gaming is getting more and more popular.

Nothing stopping anyone using a 4th gen controller with their PC either, so I imagine this will become a more widespread option for devs to use in the future.

Inferno was great aside from gear being locked.

The problem with D3 was the actual game is shallow. It's more of an arcade than a complex arpg. And game was released in a very barebones state in terms of endgame.

If D3 had D2s depth, it would still be played today.

Inferno was great aside from gear being locked.

The problem with D3 was the actual game is shallow. It's more of an arcade than a complex arpg. And game was released in a very barebones state in terms of endgame.

If D3 had D2s depth, it would still be played today.

I liked D3 better after the expansion. The best thing that ever happened to D3 was loot 2.0, IMO. And instanced looting set the new standard for how loot should be done in MP ARPGs.

I've got more hrs in D3 post expansion than PoE during the same time frame, because PoE has gotten stale, whereas D3 is easier to get back into after taking a bit of a break. Every time I try to get back into PoE after taking 3-5 leagues off, the entire game has changed, and none of my previous knowledge of the game is relevant. So I gotta do research on builds, on top of learning where the market is currently at. It's really hard to get back into PoE for this reason. Because getting back into PoE isn't as simple as logging into the game and playing after a long hiatus. And to top it off this game is league-centric, and discourages playing in permanent leagues.

I'm gonna get bored with any game, eventually, so replay value for me generally comes from my tendency to replay a game in the future. If the game discourages future replay value by design, like PoE does for me, for reasons stated above, then it's likely I'll just avoid the game and play something else.