Trading - Do we need two character types?

General Discussion
126

Perhaps a solution is in adjusting the means to which item acquisition occurs. Which won’t happen? Nor will a means to combat botting? Asking for trade sanctions on everybody because “losers play the game to much and have to much advantage as a result” is silly.

Not by providing them an inconclusive means to continue doing just what they’ve been doing, only in this case, they’ve had a direct impact on the game design itself, and not in a productive way. “Slowing them down” at what expense? May as well remove MP from the game all together then eh?

They can accomplish this by reducing the emphasis that itemization has on player performance. Eliminating part of build customization options by placing trade sanctions on the entire world as means to achieve that is ridiculous.

Sounds to me like they use the AH because they’re more frustrated that they didn’t get any useful upgrades after tediously grinding the RNG loot systemization. Clearly, even though they loathe the use of the AH and trading, they loathe ‘playing the game the way it was intended to play’ even more so. This is where ‘without trading, such a grind wouldn’t be so excruciating’ right? Because they would ‘adjust the drop rates to be more suitable and appropriate’ right?

Playing for months without an upgrade wouldn’t be a problem if there was an actual progression reversal in the game. When you’re naked even vendor bought basics are an upgrade.

Sounds like a lot of trading and the argument against it here is based off of D2 and D3. Terrible examples to use as justification for universal trade sanctions.

One can only hope that itemization in D4 is light years beyond its predecessors.

While I disagree in general - as it pertains to the Diablo franchise we may come to concurrence.

It is true as it pertains to the individual. When you start throwing multiple individuals among other variable factors such as referees and regulations, the equation is also altered. Removing trade is like adding new penalties to the game. Where points scored are removed and loss of yardage is given instead. I do apologize, I am unfamiliar with what it means to choosing to lose on purpose. I can’t relate. Unless of course ‘letting a child win’ is the same thing. What sayeth you?

127

Also very much based on PoE.

Yeah, like letting a child win (but not really the same, at least you might do it out of some misguided attempt to make the child happy then - when playing a PvE game that wouldnt make sense, since the computer wont be happy you let it win).
But essentially; something like suiciding on a boss because you dont want to beat it.
If you have the option to trade to improve your character, and choose not to, you are purposefully making your character worse.

128

Forgive me, I took one look at PoE and saw D2 clone. Coupled with the fact that pvp is non-existent (I’ve heard good things about a cut-throat mode that was discontinued) I didn’t give it the time of day.

I wouldn’t say that letting a child experience victory against a superior opponent at the expense of that persons ego is a misguided principle.

I would agree with this assertion if, by choosing to not trade, even when the option to do so exists and would LIKELY result in improvement to your character, that for not trading, you lose your offhand or primary weapon. Your character doesn’t get worse by not trading, it stays the same until you improve it otherwise.

I understand where you’re coming from. You don’t want to participate in trading but still want to flex on others and aren’t able to do so if you don’t participate in that activity. Trading sucks but not being the best you can be sucks more, so you’re forced to choose the lesser of two evils.

Eureka!

129

Are there any games out there with good trading to base D4 on then?

Not always of course. But also not a good idea just to let them win. Bad life lesson (and heck, also boring, no fun in winning against someone who isn’t trying).

130

Do MUD’s count? I didn’t think so. If not, then no.

I suppose not always not never. Always and yes bad life lesson of sorts. Never and similarly bad life lesson of defeatism. More of that winning is a psychology truth aye? :wink:

131

Maybe there is a reason.

132

I’ll be fine with the concocted restricted trading that they implement for d4.

Like I said, I don’t even bother wasting my time trading. There is a sense of satisfaction (and frustration [when failing to discover]) discovered when progressing the traditional way. Since the genre lacks so many other traditional concepts home to the RPG genre, it will have to do.

I will always find it ridiculous that ‘I don’t want to progress this way’ suggests ‘those that do shouldn’t be allowed to’ however.

133

People can trade as much as they they want for all I care. Should just be in another game mode that does not affect my game negatively.

134

Curious. If a player dies in hardcore and the victor(s) are able to loot that body (presuming that you’re playing HC) would it impact ‘your’ game negatively?

Game modes can be great, but doing so with problematic issues that emerge from fundamentally flawed design is ignoring the root cause and treating a symptom as opposed to curing the ailment.

135

Since it would be indirect trading, yeah.

Sure, but I dont believe it is possible to cure the ailment in this case.

136

You’d rather play a single player game than a multiplayer one with trading, wouldn’t you?

But why should people who enjoy playing multiplayer games have to do so under these terms of no multiplayer feature(trading) enforcement?

Would you be willing to forfeit MP for your non-trading mode?

That may very well be true. Not so much as impossible, but rather, unlikely enough to never happen.

137

I am stating a simple fact, regardless of how many different ways of getting the items. The ones that plays the most are the ones that will have them. And with free trade you are more than likely getting from a botter or a person that doesn’t have a life outside of playing the game. I am not talking about whether or not they are losers (well the botter is imo).

Sanctions are not what I am after. I am after a system that is like what D4 is offering thus far. Otherwise you are telling me if I don’t make playing the game my life’s work then love getting all of my gear from those that do or bot. Don’t even think about finding a single piece of it if you don’t do the above. Invalidate my way of playing and what I love to do just so trader Joe can have his cake. And the black market can prosper. That is silly imo.

You will still have trade in D4, it is just limited trading which is better than what D3 is severely limited trading.

You are not even wanting to slow them down. Just forget about them and let them do whatever they want. If players want to sell items for real money all power them. Don’t even think of slowing them down or stopping them. Heaven forbid doing that right. They got to have their slice of the game right.

Like those that do those things have the right to do so. Let them do it with impunity right, or maybe even make it legit like those that do it without RMT right. If you are not gonna even try to stop them then the logical extreme conclusion is to make it legit and have others join them.

I know of a way, put all of the power and customization on the character. Where the gear has no power at all or even confers any benefits. Where gear is like clothing. Great idea but I wonder how many players would be on board with that idea. After with that kind of gear you could have completely free trade. Although I highly doubt that the black market would last long under that condition.

I don’t know of any game that exists that lets you purchase the best gear in the game from a vendor. If that did happen then the rarity is so small that you would probably be trying to find such a piece for many long years.

I am thinking of other games like MMOs as well as other arpgs, MMO arpgs like Marvel Heroes Online, and so many more games.

They want to do what is forbidden in your world and that is find their own gear. Doing it without the help of someone else. Doing it without the need to barter or worry about getting scammed.

Where does D2 have skill gems that gain levels with use. Does D2 have a giant passive skill tree like PoE. One that you can socket jewels into and get all kinds of benefits. Now you can even socket cluster jewels in them to expand the skill tree to include even more nodes that will benefit your build.

There are some children that more skilled at playing games than adults. Don’t underestimate the skills of a child at playing games. Otherwise you are wanting to let adults always win that way they can say they are better than children. So regardless of the skill of the child and adult the adult always wins right.

138

It simply goes back to drop rates being balanced around the existence of trading. When the “choice” to not do so means you’re progressing 10x or whatever slower than those who do, you’re going to become the proverbial leper in multiplayer scenarios where groups are seeking efficiency. There’s also the simple reality that select builds may be virtually unplayable until certain items fall into the player’s lap, and if rare enough, further risk never being seen without trading.

In the end, it’s not really that players don’t want to “work” for their loot, it’s that some recognize it as both an unneeded hurdle and a process that is 100% out of their control. For a casual that finally finds a semi-rare item, it might be exciting find. Until they hit the market and see it’s worth crap because more hardcore players (or bots) have found exponentially more over time. This is a scenario I personally view as demoralizing, and can result in players quitting when they realize they’re never really going to get on equal footing. Flaws of something like a paragon system excluded here.

Ultimately, with a proper crafting and augmenting system, trading would not be required. When someone has an item created through these related processes, you’ll know they went through a specific gathering process that everyone else with the same or similar would have gone through at a ceiling level. There’s no “newbie finding it as their first drop at max level” or “I’ve been playing 8 hours a day for a year and never seen it drop” that goes on to spite players on both ends. Similarly, I’m not against D3’s “trade window” because it at least implies playing with people and conferring a direct sense of cooperation. The timer also puts pressure on the finder as to whether or not they really need it, instead of holing it away hoping for a later score.

Otherwise, online games have been struggling with economies for decades now. People thinking doing X, Y, Z will “fix” whatever both assume that devs have never considered or tried such things, or that it may further conflict with intended play. Something not being a problem for one player also doesn’t mean it can’t be an issue for others, which tends to be a core hurdle for this or something like the respec debate. My own core development philosophy boils down to a simple, “If the majority of players can’t experience a particular piece of content, it isn’t content worth developing.” And this isn’t to be confused for pandering to people who just want handouts or not being willing to jump through some reasonable hoops. It just means cutting out BS that keeps people from their goals through no fault of their own.

1 Like
139

I am at a loss here. These seems to be such angst that even the possibility of conducting a trade with someone who bots is so undeniably forbidden that it must have any and all chance at occurring eliminated. Even when there are other people who don’t particularly care who or where the items they’re after came from.

Fair enough. Although I am not saying that if you don’t play as much as others or similarly allow a machine to autonomously collect your loot that you shouldn’t enjoy obtaining those items at all. Given the title of the thread - regarding all or nothing in regards to trading, you’re also invalidating another persons way of playing by making trading an all or nothing game mode which is basically ‘my way is more important to me than their way is to them, so it’s my way or the highway’ mentality. The black market will exist. Whether or not it prospers is entirely up to the suspension team. Same with autonomous playing because virtual wealth is more important to those type than actually playing.

Changing the way the journey is traveled because some people depreciate the value of the journey in favor of the destination, when it is the responsibility of the TOS enforcement team to judiciously determine who arrives at the destination accordingly is inappropriate.

Skill increase on use, with autonomous detection could certainly improve time invested equating to skill increasing and thus address autonomy & over significant influence of gear.

Bfa @ Azerite gear comes to mind, most recently. Just so happens to be the same company working on D4 :stuck_out_tongue:

Do duly note that I am not in favor of such a system. I am in favor of there being a balance between risk & reward and all risk no reward or all reward no risk is not balanced.

Enabling bartering doesn’t prevent a person from finding it themselves without the help of someone else or worry about getting scammed should they prohibit themselves from participation in such bartering. There are also safe guards incorporated that when paying attention (as someone should when conducting business) prevent being scammed.

PoE is still a D2 clone in my eyes. Take one look at the inventory screen and tell me it’s not. Whether it has features or lacks features that D2 has or doesn’t have is irrelevant.

What in the actual F?

140

This is piss-poor itemization systemization. A character shouldn’t be at the mercy of RNG in order to be viable or not.

This will always be true when concerning casual versus non-casual. If they want to be in the haves category but are in fact in the haves not category - aren’t you saving them precious time of transitioning by making it glaringly obvious for them? Take that with a grain of salt.

The conflict of interest between MP & SP in this franchise as it pertains to your development philosophy is huge. I can take it or leave it. Although, there may very well have not been massive co-op boss fights in D4 if adhering to this doctrine.

141

Yes, I certainly would.

You can have perfectly fine multiplayer without trading.

No. There is absolutely no good reason to.
Solo self found and self found are not the same.

But yes, if there was no other choice, I’d take solo self found mode with balanced gear progression, over only having a trade mode.
Hey, add the option for offline too, and we have a deal!

Yeah, a good point.

I would actually love a good economics game. Best one I have tried was Star Wars Galaxies. I have heard good things about EVE Online as well.
But I dont think A-RPG and economics game is a good mix. Choose which kind of game you want to make and stick with it. Making a kitchen sink game wont turn out well.

And there shouldn’t be.
Or rather, they should be there, but it should also be possible to solo them.

142

Single player preferring gamers telling multiplayer preferring gamers to go play a different multiplayer game because this multiplayer game is supposed to be a single player game.

shots fired

143

I am not telling them to play a different game, I am telling them to play the other game mode.
Also I wouldn’t consider the Diablo franchise multiplayer more than it is singleplayer.
I dont know if there are any statistics, but I wouldnt be surprised if singleplayer was the majority. Especially for D1 and D2.

144

If they’re trying to develop the game in the direction of favoring MP over SP?

Do they need the previous die hard fans’ permission to do so?

This is getting out of hand.

145

No, they dont. But we can be grumpy about it :slight_smile:

Multiplayer only would surely be a deal breaker for me.
Trading is not a deal breaker, in the sense that I would likely buy the game, but probably I would get bored really fast, like with PoE.

1 Like