I have a broad definition of what counts as a remaster using Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa as a guide.
They are all art.
1 Like
Well for the sake of humorous exchange, bravo.
Not quite sure Leonardo would agree with those interpretations but it is your money after all.
For the sake of discussion, the art put forth in the post was not created with the goal of a remastering. (Staying as close to the original form as possible.)
And while some of those are interesting pieces of art, they do not fit the context of our major differences.
However, I can see now that our main point of contention comes from differing views on what a remastering should be.
This is an irrevocable difference within the main framework of our positions. So we are at an impasse, as I have no desire to backtrack or derail to the interpretation of a definition.
Have a pleasant day. 
Again, belittling others. Can you really not make a post without that kind of language? You dont like it, we get it.
And to your point: that is an argument against the lobby system. And it should be improved (has already been stated further above). Not a point against a different loot option.
Why is it not? On card shark tables, strong players take the money of fishes, who lack experience in playing high-stakes games.
In FFA loot games, strong clickers take the items of players, who click slower than them.
Sounds pretty equivalent to me. They take something from others, while given the other party the false impression of having some benefit despite stripping them of literally everything they can.
So if you and me work for the same company, do the same job, the same hours, have the same qualification and get a paycheck with a random numer on it at the end of the day.
You are getting a 1 million rupies check, while i get a 1 rupies check, still you are kicking me against the shins, take my check as well and say that you simply took the “opportunity”.
I say, let you keep your check and let me keep my check.
Your “opportunity” sounds a bit like greed to me.
You cannot rob something, that is not picked up yet. Remember? You said it yourself.
No pickup, no steal. Your words.
Pickit was an example.
Melee is an option, but maybe i want to take the option to play a ranged character. Why should i get a different chance to get loot with a perfectly viable character than a melee character.
Isnt it a bit authoritarian to claim that melee characters should get better loot because they are melee?
Also melee characters are not more likely to be “slain”. They are also more tanky, have more hp, usually have max block and have spells to get them out of harms way.
Bottom line, it does not change the FACT that you are closer to the click, hence the click is more likely to be clicked by you. I am not discussing class balance here.
I gave several suggestions on how it could do that. All of which you seem not to read, but reiterate your mantra of “i click it, so i own it”. It’s not as entertaining, as you think it might be.
Which one is the Leonardo one?
1 Like
Do you play D3?
With the transition to modern battlenet, you do not need to sift through games. For example in D3, your character type already limits what public multiplayer games you can see (hardcore/softcore and seasons/non-seasons). There is no sifting whatsoever.
When a player opens their game to the public, they define the type of D3 game (e.g. GR, regular rift, key warden, bounties). When a player is looking for a public multiplayer game, they simply filter by predefined types (e.g. GR, regular rift, key warden, bounties) and done. No sifting is needed.
The other thing to consider is that D2R will have a global servers and have done away with regions. So players in Europe can play with people in the US. As you might imagine, the physical distance from the hosted server will create differential ping (assuming that the internet quality is identical between these players). This also creates problems with the idea of FFA/click first loot.
Now factor in that even in the US as Covid-19 revealed there is incredible diversity in internet quality dependent on where you live. I am lucky to have gig internet and live comfortably. I can travel a few miles down the road where people are at an economic disadvantage where our school system was provided computer and hotspots to students who go to the same school as my kids. You can imagine in cases like this, it would suck to miss out on loot because you had lower quality internet than I or lived further away from Blizzard’s servers.
This is a huge downside in d3. Being able to name games and have specific ‘runs’ the same people join is critical to d2r’s success.
I hope to all that is unholy, that d2r doesn’t use d3’s game creation/join method. It is absolutely terrible, especially on console.
1 Like
I would rather see some kind of party-system (d3 also has that). Where you can have parties that span over multiple games.
And maybe even an in-build remake mechanism that allows you to continue the run without the leave/rejoin bit.
Actually, when you look at d2, we are not playing game-wise as the current system supports, but party-wise.
Runs are usually more productive with a stable (as in, random people, who rejoin the next run) party. But the system works against this, because other people can possibly join those remakes faster than the people who are in the previous game.
I think it would make sense that instead of games, players could search for parties, which would have objectives like “baalrun”, “csrun” and then be able to stick with these parties across multiple games.
Once slots in the parties open up, players could join them just as they do with games nowadays. The benefit would be more stability across games.
Of course trading and some other aspects might still require the old game-based system. So my idea is about runs specifically.
1 Like
I’m done trying to correct your confusion. Words have meanings, learn them. We will never agree, luckily the terrible system you desire will not defile this sacred game.
I’ll try my best to live up to your eloquence.
As i said, first anni that you “lose”, you will agree. mark my words.
You say this quite often. As if you were trying to convince yourself of something you cant possibly know.
And out of those 3 things, only 2 things he could have done in 1998, if he had designed the game differently.
- stamina bar: they added it, removing/replacing it would have been easily possible
- gold autopick-up: a bit harder to judge. But since already pacman and super mario had autopickup, they should have been able to implement them
So with these two topics, i think he is reflecting on his past design decisions along the lines of: “with the knowledge of today, what would i decide differently”.
But his third point is something completely different. In 1998 instanced/split loot was nowhere to be found, he basically would have to had invented it from scratch back then. So obviously, it is not something that they would have done in 1998.
Here his reasoning is more along the lines of: “if you had any feature that modern games provide in your diablo 2 (to make it better), which one would it be?”
And he chose instanced loot.
Or you could just, you know, type it in a decent reply instead of repeatedly evading.
Yeah, PKing doesn’t really help. The point is to make your fellow players less competition. Engaging in PvP does the opposite of that.
Then you flag for PvP. Rather simple, right?
A fair system makes everyone a loser? You sure about that one?
It does if you’re playing with people and have set agreements about loot, and then break them. As you say in the next section.
A random assignment personal loot system doesn’t entitle anyone to loot either, though. Does it scare you because under a fair system you might get less loot? Well - yet again - don’t worry because we want it to be optional, and you don’t need to participate.
Also, the problem there is if someone breaks those agreed upon rules you don’t really have any recourse.
Give me a break. Don’t sit there and tell me you pick the first game at the top of the list and join it. You’re sifting through the games anyway, dude.
Besides, if it were implemented correctly there would simply be a checkmark not to see all those games.
Because…? It’s already been demonstrated that it doesn’t necessarily increase the drop rate and it doesn’t entitle people to loot because, well, random distribution. Those seem to be your main gripes against it and they’ve been addressed.
Then play solo or turn on your hostility.
Maybe because they haven’t shown willingness to actually DO that.
By the way, wanting personal loot doesn’t mean I’m any less in favor of banning cheaters. Even if Blizzard does get way better at it, though, there will always be people attempting to cheat. Why shouldn’t we close off things we KNOW cheaters will go for?
So, what, only someone who can yoink loot away from you has a meaningful impact? Surely you can see that argument is crap, right?
Actually, yes, since if you look up the word “master,” it implies they should be making improvements and innovations to the original - MASTERING the original. No changes = not a remaster, just a rerelease.
And let’s face it, there’s no doubt Blizzard is trying to attract a new crowd here - people who won’t have 20 years of experience with a different way. Barely anyone has a full 20 years of experience with it, if we’re being totally honest.
Besides… when else would you possibly change it?
2 Likes
I think you missed something here. Ploot as being described by many would leave nothing for those people in town to even grab. I don’t really understand how so many people blindly against ploot keep missing points such as this. Is it purposeful, willful ignorance or a lack of reading comprehension?
1 Like
It’s your lack of context.
Go back and read again.
You claimed that failure to pickup a good item “completely denied the entire value of the run”. Therefore, access to pickup all potential drops have no value according to your statement. You also claim ironically that no D2 player is entitled to loot so how can it be robbed if it was never yours in the first place according to your quotes.
Let’s assume that there are zero good drops among the 68 drops due to D2 RNG in a FFA game:
A. Were both players completely denied the entire value of the run?
B. Did the game steal the good drops from the players, since the game algorithm/RNG did not roll a good drop?
Let’s assume that there is 1 good drop among the 68 drops due to D2 RNG in a multiplayer D2 FFA game:
A. If the 1 good drop was picked up by another player who was actively killing monsters in a FFA loot game, did the player(s) who missed out denied the entire value of the run?
B. Did the player who got the drop steal that drop?
C. Did the player who picked up the good drop rob the other player?
Is it your opinion that all players should have the opportunity to see and click on all drops in Diablo 2 multiplayer game? It does not guarantee them the drop, just the opportunity to click?
1 Like
You claimed that failure to pickup a good item “completely denied the entire value of the run”. Therefore, access to pickup all potential drops have no value according to your statement.
Insane clown logic does not follow. 100% troll. Also, you misrepresented my claim. More trolling from you.
You also claim ironically that no D2 player is entitled to loot so how can it be robbed if it was never yours in the first place according to your quotes.
Bad faith troll argument, what you are robbing players of is the OPPORTUNITY to pick up the item. This is a concept a small child would understand. Again, you’ve purposefully misrepresented my stance because you are a sad transparent troll.
ALL contributing players have the opportunity to click item = GOOD
ONLY ONE contributing player can click item = NOT GOOD
PLEASE GET OUT.
Yes, in team play no one is entitled to a drop. That means you don’t own it until you pick it up. Sorry that you can’t understand that. Sorry that you’re confusing this simple concept and concluding that it’s okay to remove the drop from contention because you got jealous. Ploot arguments are clown arguments. You’ve got nothing so you’re just trying to twist meanings, it’s pathetic.
For clarity, this is what you wrote. It seems straightforward to interpret.
In a multiplayer game, if a player clears a map by themselves without other players around, is that player entitled to loot? Yes or no.
Also, in D2 multiplayer games there are scenarios where it is impossible to have equal access to drops. Consider a 3 player game: one player clears map A while another player clears map B. The third player can not be at two places at once. Therefore, player C will miss out on the initial opportunity to collect drops in either map A or map B.
2 Likes
You’re just trolling at this point.
Now I see why you demand to use the quote function instead of a block quote ; it magically goes away when a troll like you edits their post. Very convenient for you. Stop replying to me, we will never agree. Glad the devs are wise enough to ignore people like you.
In a multiplayer game, if a player clears a map by themselves without other players around, is that player entitled to loot? Yes or no.
If the player wants the loot they should click on it to pick it up. Sorry you can’t understand that. If they don’t pick it up the loot will expire or another player might come along and pick it up before them! GASP! So no, they aren’t “entitled” to it. Go play your lame dodging semantics game with someone else, I’m done with you.
For clarity, this is what you wrote. It seems straightforward to interpret.
You insufferable troll. Stop. It’s not “failure to pickup a good item”
It’s having the SYSTEM HIDE the ONLY good item from you so that you NEVER HAD A CHANCE TO PICK IT UP IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Failure ==> NO, YOUR SYSTEM HID IT - NOT PLAYER FAILURE
“a” good item ==> NO, THE ONLY WORTHWHILE ITEM FROM THE RUN
===> The entire value of the run was denied.
Stop. Trolling.
I do not think that is how the forum works. You may want to edit what I quoted above and see if my quote disappears. I strongly suspect that it will not change.
Also, the forum allows you to ignore all posts from any user. You can see all forum members battletag by quoting them or hovering over their avatar. Once you see their battletag
- Simply left click on your own avatar in the top right corner.
- Left click on the person icon that is labelled Preferences when hovered above.
- Left click on preferences
- In the new screen, click on users then add forum poster’s battletag to your ignore list and set the duration.
- Hit save changes.
Using this method you can ignore all posts from users that you select. This will hide all past and future posts from that “ignored” user(s).
1 Like
It literally just happened to me. Maybe it’s because you edited fast enough after posting that it didn’t count as an edit. Doesn’t matter, stop pinging me I’m not interested in entertaining a troll anymore.
Is it only me who gets tired of reading topics about Personal Loot? 
Seems like that is what some of the people are only concerned about.
In addition to ignoring any poster on the forum using the above described method, you can use adblock software where you customize it with keywords. This would allow you to hide any post with terms that you do not want to read about such as “personal loot”.
You own yourself with your own logic and call other people trolls.
Epic.^^
And you did it again.^^
You mean like saying that somebody robs something you did not own to begin with?
Exactly. It is not because it is more readable, allows to see who wrote the original quote, allows to jump to or expand the quoted content.
For some reason we are also using the quote function on your posts, but ofc it is just because we want to ninja-change your quoted lines. You are truely the center of the universe.
Good point! Now, since they are not entitled to the loot - as you rightfully said - let’s just try to distribute that unentitled loot fairly among all who deserve a share of the loot by the rules of participation.
Now what is your argument against that? I cant wait to hear it.
Actually you do have a chance to pick it up. You know what chance? A fair chance.
Does that sound fair to you?
I actually wrote a thesis in logic, but i fail to follow yours. Would you care to elaborate.
1 Like