Seriously, you don't need to take the risk

Diablo II: Resurrected General Discussion
1

…of adding a “toggleable” loot filter, charm inventory, or stackable options.

[Edit] So apparently the going idea now is that these toggleables would only be toggleable if a player opts in to a separate community, ala HC/SC. Like opting in to “additions” instead of “original” at character creation. That’d be so much better than individual toggles for all in multiplayer. That’s determined a few replies in.

Because if you do introduce those things, they will actually not be optional in multiplayer.

If they give multiplayers an advantage, they will become mandatory in order to stay competitive.

Do you really want to essentially force us to play with these non-D2 gameplay systems - which are quite unnecessary?

Single player is entirely different - I think single player could be loaded with options and toggles. The single player could have fun curating their specific D2 experience.

That’s not so for multiplayer at all. Please, please don’t implement these things and tell us it’s “our choice” whether to use them or not. We will practically have no such choice.

If the choice is made game-to-game, I shudder at the potential complexity of unintended negative results on other aspects of the game. Also, the community will become incredibly fractured as some people play with a loot filter, some with charm inv and stacks, others nothing, others stacks, blah. This would be better than individual toggles (which would be absurd), but I think it’d still be quite a shame to lose the sort of spiritual quality of everyone playing essentially with the same game mechanics. I think that just provides us with a baseline community experience that goes away when we’re no longer playing by the same rules.

If you feel you must implement some of these things, I think a separate server would be the best solution. Community spirit is then preserved within each server, and the issue of needing to use these unnecessary mechanics goes away completely.

Thank you very much for all your incredible work with this so far – I’ve thought for a long time that the simpler you keep your focus with D2R, the better.

The simplest course that will guarantee success is to keep D2R as a “pure” restoration of D2.

I think there is no reason to risk significant changes, which are unnecessary anyway.

Thank you again for this near-miracle of a project!

[Title edited by forum moderator. Forum moderator note: Calling out individual developers or the development team in your title or post is against our forum guidelines. Please focus on discussion of the feedback and/or suggestion in your thread.]

9 Likes
2

You seem to have completely misunderstood how toggles function in D2 and D3.

Characters created using toggles, like ladder/seasonal and hardcore/softcore, cannot play with characters who used different toggles.

So this entire post is built on a false understanding of how the very mechanic you’re trying to rebuke functions, and the way it works right now in those games, and the way we want it to work in D2R, already addresses what you said.

3 Likes
3

So you’re saying a loot filter toggle would be made on character creation and only loot filterers would be able to play with each other?

So do you want to split the community into HC/SC, ladder/non, loot filter/non, charm inv/non, loot filter+charm inv/loot filter, loot filter+charm inv/non, etc… there are too many iterations.

How do you envision toggles for significant gameplay changes working in D2R, my good Drium?

Feel free to take your time responding, I’m not going to hang out here for a while typing back and forth. =P

1 Like
4

The D2 community is already split in over 40 branches right now, and still “healthy” according to people who still play it, bot plague aside.

USEast,West,Europe,Asia x Softcore/Hardcore x Ladder/Non x D2/LoD

That’s 32 branches alone, + all the branches that exist on online mods, which is at least 8. So over 40 branches, without investigating every mod to get a full picture.

This is still less than that, so that argument is also invalid. =)

5

So… you’re seriously advocating for a:

Loot filter players / non-loot filterers
Charm inv / non charm invers

What about those who want two or three toggles vs those who only want one or two toggles? Are they all split also?

Loot filter + charm inventory / Loot Filter
Loot filter + charm inventory / charm inventory
LF + CI + stackables / Loot filter
LF + CI + stackable / LF + CI

You see how this quickly gets totally ridiculous…

Are you seriously recommending that?

I at least know Blizzard would never implement such a thing =P

6

Actually no I would advocate that all changes to the classic 1.14 formula be rolled into a single toggle.

You want charm inventory? Well you are also playing with stackables, etc.

Making a million toggles WOULD be stupid, I agree.

Making a single toggle for classic vs modern (aka pure vs changes) still amounts to less separation than D2 has right now.

Global Server x Softcore/Hardcore x Ladder/Non x D2/LoD/Modern.

12 branches.

A far cry from D2’s 32, without counting mods.

4 Likes
7

So either a separate server or one more split like original/addition?

I advocated for that myself at the end of my post, my dear fine Drium! If such changes were deemed necessary, which I contest – but if they were, I agree I think that’d be the wisest way to implement them.

I think we’re in agreement, then!

8

You did but your entire argument was also based on the idea that there would be cross-pollination with toggles, which as toggles are implemented in D2 and D3 currently, would not happen.

And TBH you could iterate further. Every new toggle only increases the amount of branches by 4. You could add a few more and still be easily under the current amount that D2 has, which again, people claim is “extremely healthy” and “doing fine” right now despite being split up on 32 branches.

9

did they mention they were also adding these things in that investor call or something? id seriously be shocked if they added even just the charm inventory, let alone anything further or bigger. I hope they give us some more QoL and buff the dead skills, but lets not hold our breathe because of the 6 people who keep spamming this forum acting like major overhauls are coming. lol

3 Likes
10

I actually didn’t hear the investor call yet, not sure if I will - so this isn’t in direct response to anything from Blizz, thank Tyrael. Other than their vague allusions to perhaps implementing other mechanics that mods use. But primarily a response to some of the input on the forum, as usual =P

1 Like
11

I mean you also have the same 5-6 people constantly spamming “don’t change my game” or reusing a quote from the store page to claim that the game will absolutely not get changed even one bit and the surveys Blizzard sent out were just to troll people.

Truth is probably somewhere inbetween.

4 Likes
12

I think stackable gems/runes is the only one I can say isn’t much of a balance issue.

I’m a little worried if it would be easier to mass dupe HRs, but other than that, it seems mostly to be QoL, considering they don’t plan on giving us unlimited space, likely.

13

Touche. literally laughed out loud. got me. :clown_face:

Once you guys corrected me yesterday about how Cross-progression works im 100% expecting mass dupes shortly after launch, on at least a couple systems. Then they will dupe their 500 ber and jah runes and easily Xfer them to the PC servers to sell for an even higher price. GG D2jsp, you won.

1 Like
14

TBH the idea that Blizzard sent those surveys out just to tease or troll people is probably the most laughable thing I have scene on these forums yet. There’s no world where that kind of decision got rolled out just to mock the playerbase that wants the game to be touched up and modernized.

The survey guarantees nothing, mind you, but they would not have wasted time and money sending them out if they were not going to serve a purpose.

That’s not how companies work.

You don’t just throw cash out the window, and Blizzard is pretty stingy with their wallets. If people got paid to make and send those surveys, it’s definitely not just for laughs.

1 Like
15

Also Drium, they made autogold toggleable. That’s obviously far less significant a change than a loot filter/CI/stacks, but I was going off of their pattern there.

16

i thought you said this to exaggerate what i was saying? whos literally saying the surveys were sent to troll people? lmao thats hilarious. I just don’t think they hold THAT much weight, but clearly it wasn’t a joke.

17

Yes that is a real argument someone made on here.

That the surveys were sent out to troll and that the answers to them would not matter.

We live in a society!

Axe: yeah but I think we can both agree that Autogold isn’t the kind of toggle that requires a character be separated from others, it’s not nearly as big of a deal as Hardcore/Softcore or Ladder/Non, or the proposed changes that should be rolled out in a Classic/Modern toggle.

It would be absolutely ridiculous and balance-breaking to make characters who utilize different inventory and maybe even loot systems coexist in the same environment.

The reason we want those toggles is because there’s absolutely no reason Blizzard/VV can’t pull off a win-win scenario here, and give both audiences what they want, without taking away from either audiences either.

1 Like
18

This 100%. Adding options does not remove the original.

6 Likes
19

As long as those options are in a separate community, as Drium suggests. If they’re in the same community there are unavoidable serious issues, as my original post expresses.

I’ve never seen someone state so unequivocally that these toggles would only work in a separate community until Drium here did it. Those toggles have always been described as a toggle similar to autogold by their proponents, as far as I understood them. I may have been misunderstanding them - but you guys have surely not always been advocating for a separate community.

So I’m not sure what happened, but if that’s the outcome, GREAT!

20

I have always 100% been advocating for separate communities. Can’t speak for others.

Doesn’t mean I’ve always said it and repeated it but that’s always been something I’ve pushed. No point only catering to one audience.

1 Like