If significant respec costs existed in D3:
Speaking only for yourself, would you play the game more or less?
Speaking for only yourself, would you be more likely to play “cookie-builds” or experiment more?
For D3 broadly, do you think it would increase build diversity or experimentation for the playerbase as a whole or more likely to lead to a higher percent of players doing “cookie-cutter” builds?
Probably less. However the biggest reason would be because Diablo 3 has little to no unique character building (skill leveling and such) imo. A majority of character power comes from gear. As such making respec impossible and/or difficult for Diablo 3 wouldn’t be ideal imo. In fact I would say it would probably be impossible to properly play Diablo 3 with no respec considering how our skill bar automatically gets skills added as we level and we have no choice as to which slots first gets filled. In that scenario literally every character would be an exact clone in terms of skills.
However in the case of a game where there is some character building, and I have a choice as to what skills I can unlock and build like Diablo 2 and potentially 4; I wouldn’t mind a respec system that offers a few free ones to players, with further respec players would need to work towards.
define “significant” costs? also, theres zero chance the cost would ever be that high. Pretty sad attempt at exaggeration to prove a moot point of yours. There needs to be a cost, but not a giant one. Just enough to make build choice meaningful, not so high that you have to farm for days just to respec once.
I left it vague as Blizzard’s blog post used the exact same word “significant.” They wrote:
“as your character grows, the effort and cost required to respec will grow too. In the end-game, changing your build will require a significant investment, to appropriately match the time and effort you’ve put into defining your character.”
I added the underline.
See:
https://news.blizzard.com/en-us/diablo4/23583664/diablo-iv-quarterly-update-december-2020
I can not specifically quantify what they meant. Since this is a hypothetical for D3, Let’s say 10 hours of dedicated farming to get a respec token. It could be more or less.
Definitely more build diversity. And more interesting gameplay.
That said, you cant polish a turd. D3 would not suddenly become good, only by adding respec costs. Much more would be needed.
Respec costs is one part of a larger vision for a game.
As has been shown and explained in the respec thread, if a game as free respecs, the rest of the game is shaped around that fact. As it happened in Diablo 3. So you cant just take the respec as a thing that exists on its own, without impacting other parts of the game.
Thus, if Diablo 3 had a significant cost, it would also be different in other related areas. All of which would make the game better.
And yes, to answer the question, that would make me much more likely to play more.
Not that playing more is necessarily a success criteria. I want better gameplay, not just more hours.
you didn’t leave it vague though. you specifically said SIGNIFICANT, didn’t you? which implies a lot. You could’ve/should’ve said “would you play D3 more if it had a respec cost at all?”. Then you’d get more unbiased responses. Putting “significant” was a very obvious attempt to get biased results in your favor. lol
Free respecs was, in my opinion, the worst idea D3 ever head. But making you farm for 10+ hours just for a single respec is equally a bad idea. Obviously the solution is a middle-ground. a moderate cost for respecs that gradually increases with level/uses but also has a cap so it doesn’t scale infinitely and you can try as many builds as you want if you play a lot of end-game.
I said “significant”. I chose it because Blizzard used that word in their blog.
Significantly less. I change between speed farming and GR builds fairly often (because I can’t grind the same exact content for 20 hours in a row). Having to pay a huge cost every time I change between my rift/bounty build and my higher GR build would be a deal killer.
I could make alts for the same class to avoid this as I did in D2, but the problem Is having limited character slots unlike in D2. Many of my nonseason character slots are dedicated to muling because of the limited stash space.
Another problem I would have is dealing with Season Achievements. I go for Achievement leader board each season. For conquests like “Master of Sets” and the 6 GR one, I would need a ton of tokens just resetting for each build on both SC and HC. Even ones like Sprinter/Speed Racer would require me to have 4 tokens to change to the speed build then back.
For this game, respec costs are a time sink for the sake of time sinks.
Respec what exactly? There are no choices. Main stat or Vit after 800?
If the respec costs were significant, we’d have even less build diversity than we have now. Why try anything outside the meta if a) you’re gimping yourself and b) it also costs you to try, resources and/or time.
How does a respec cost equal better gameplay?
And why does build choice have to be ’ meaningful’? Why can’t I change from a HotA build to WW and back whenever I want, and how does me doing that affect other players?
Instead of a respec cost, I prefer an idea in one of the D4 threads that suggested that the longer your character has an item and/or skill equipped continuously for, the more power they get. And if they change that item or skill, the gains they have made decline over time back to base levels. So there’s a reason to stay with a particular build, but also no barrier to trying a different one if you so choose.
Respec costs will also apply to changing active and passive skills.
Significant is quite relative here.
Anyway, give players a place to test different builds (a dungeon/arena with no loot/xp, where you can switch things freely), so they can see what they want to do, before committing.
It forces strengths and weaknesses to each build. It adds choices and consequences, and the need to adapt your playstyle. Not merely switch skills for every situation.
Yeah, I have argued for that system too. And I would be quite fine with it as a solution instead of a normal respec cost.
It allows people to experiment endlessly in a short time, at no additional cost, after they respecced the first time (where they lost the buffed skills bonus).
However, no, an unused skill need to go back to base lvl the second you take it off, otherwise you are even further incentivizing the constant shifting of skills, to keep them all upgraded. That would be worse.
Also, in such a system, if you change a single skill (or skill upgrade), or passive, ALL skills need to go back to base lvl, or you create an incentive to make meta builds that easily can be changed into other meta builds, limiting build diversity. Like a cross-over fireball/meteor build for example where you just change one skill around.
ALL respecs need to be considered full respecs, otherwise you skew the game balance in really bad ways imo.
Without using a respec, you have challenge A and challenge B where you will use exactly the same active and passive skills. You can not adapt these attributes as these as they are locked. That means that you have less adaptability in both playstyle and gameplay. It is mashing the same six buttons that perform the exact same six actions.
I will respectfully disagree there, the bonus for having a skill/item equipped long term and the rate that the bonus declines should be such that ‘hopping’ from one skill to another and back is detrimental overall to power. But I’m against instantly losing any ‘built up’ bonus, as it will IMHO lock players into meta builds and make them reluctant to experiment with anything different. If they try a different skill / item and stick with it for a significant period of time, then they shouldn’t be able to go back to the original item/skill and pick up where they left off. But if they only change for the equivalent of a few rifts/bounties just to see what the item/skill is like in comparison, then they should be able to do so without penalty. IMHO.
I’d have quit years ago.
Before D3 has an armory system, I made 2 or 3 of the same class just to assign a role for them. Without an armory, changing equipment and skills are annoying and time-consuming for one class.
So I will have, well, for example, 1 Wizard for Rift/Bounty farming that wearing Set A and 2nd Wizard for GR pushing will be using Set B including their own legendary gems and items that will not be shared with the first Wizard.
So yeah, if D3 has a significant respec cost, I will ensure myself to do enough to research from the Internet on what is the BiS build for my class before I commit the build on them. Also, will create multiple class for role assignment as well.
Be reasonable plz.
In D2 you need about 10 minutes at most to get the tokens from Hell bosses to respect your hero.
I regularly switch between an ultra-fast / squishy build for speed-farming bounties, Nephalem Rifts and low level Greater Rifts and a slower / more powerful / tankier build for high-end Greater Rift pushing. I don’t care how significant or otherwise the costs for respec’ing would be, any cost at all would result in me being way less likely to want to play, up to and including just not bothering at all.
Or create a new D3 character and ask for quick power level to Lv70 is a better choice.
I would have stopped playing D3 long ago with respec costs.
And I will probably not buy D4 if it comes with respec costs.