This. You need stash space for aspects, and that gets real dicey when every class has its own needs. Aspects should never have been an inventory item.
These devs literally smoking street crack.
4 Likes
The base character limit is 10. You don’t have enough space to keep gear for all of them in the stash, assuming different builds.
As for the uniques, do you know how many uniques Path of Exile has? HUNDREDS. It’s been around for about 10 years. Someday, D4 is going to have been around for 10 years, and what are you going to do with hundreds of uniques in the tiny stash space we have?
This should be fixable.
You simply remove code to load it.
Why is it being loaded anyways? It is unnecessary.
Well there definitely is a good reason.
The following items take up the most space
- Gems
- Legendary aspects
- Malignant hearths
- Items you store till you have all the new items you need for your next build or build upgrade
So gems you can limit, for sure.
But since not all leg. aspects are available in the codex, you definitely need to store those which are not available for future use.
Also you store those are available, but you have a better value for them.
And as more characters you have the more aspects you will store.
Same for hearths.
I got my 4 stash tabs full with only 2 characters.
If you play only 1 char, you are right, it is enough. But in such games people tend to run different chars.
2 Likes
Wont have to worry about uniques. Theyre impossible to get.
Hahaha now it all makes sense. They dont want everyone to get gear because their game cant handle the stashing requirements associated with that.
2 Likes
That’s nonsense. I’ve already dropped 2 Bloodless Scream, a Howl from Below, 2 Greaves of the Empty Tomb, and 3 Frostburn (every arpg needs vendor trash uniques). Only level 64.
Well, I can tell that almost nobody in this thread is a professional developer or system architect. If you were, you’d know that you don’t have near enough information to make any determination as to the merit of their current design.
It’s unfortunate too, because I like that they shared this information, but this kind of uneducated and ignorant response will make them want to not share such details going forward.
To be clear, I’m not saying they do have solid design, but I know that I don’t know enough to be sure one way or another.
1 Like
There’s 3 possibilities here 1) large enough chunk of original dev’s are gone 2) complete ineptitude and 3) they are lying.
quite the contrary. this the kinda thing that a system architect is paid to have not happen
could there be an excuse for this? sure. but it would almost assuredly be cutting corners and shortcut type of thing
but from what others have said it is likely a holdover from D3 engine. if that is true then it wouldn’t be simple to solve.
the solution would have been to not use that engine
but that would cost more money which is again a cut corners or shortcut type of deal
(although idk if they use that engine but that would people above said)
1 Like
You literally cannot know what possible technological constraints are in play.
You don’t need to be any sort of programmer to know that loading every character’s ENTIRE STASH every time they load, anywhere in the game, is utterly asinine. If you’re making any sort of excuse that that is a reasonable way to program the game, you’re legitimately the definition of a sycophant.
It doesn’t matter, at all, what technological constraints, if any, lead to that outcome. They should have been addressed prior to the game launching. There are only two possible outcomes to this revelation; incompetence or fallacy.
4 Likes
I didn’t say that it was reasonable (try reading my entire post…especially that last part). What I said is that we don’t have nearly enough information to understand why it was designed in such a way. You can yell all you want, but you’re talking from a place of ignorance.
1 Like
Well the same issue seems to persist in D3 as well, so i don’t think there is any empathy to be felt.
Like who created this itemization, end game, class balance, dungeons.
1 Like
so either they using the old netcode or they reusing big parts of D3
man D3 came out in 2012…that is some legacy code…
but I seen people mention literally WoW has same issue
then,code from 2004
1 Like
Its so dumb its actually funny.
1 Like
They did this on purpose.
D3 had a similar argument for years.
They did not want to use resources on massive amounts of stash space so they made a way to excuse their behavior.
1 Like
Dude has a point and doesn’t really deserve to be ignored for this.
I’m an entry level programmer, I’d never load anyone’s entire stash when i see them out and about in the world. There’s no way my client should ever know anything other than the visual data of the other person. If i inspect them, I’d load that data there.
https://twitter.com/JPiepiora/status/1682622069807394817
Seems like a really weird choice and not one I could imagine a lot of professional software engineers be comfortable with.
4 Likes
CSU east bay and UC berkeley in california put out some of the best software engineers in the world. and are a massive reason as to why california is an unstoppable powerhouse in world politics.
with that said blizzard doesnt seem to be getting programmers with east bay or berkeley diplomas, they’re too busy shopping for talent in guantanamo bay or failed CIA directors.
(dont believe me google it)
1 Like
Meanwhile in Path of Exile…
100+ stash tabs.
6 Likes
thats not a fair comparison, because diablo 4 has trade and the loading is needed for trade, so it has to happen this way. -some blizz fanboy im sure.