Are you saying that we're bombarded with pleasure in Diablo 3?
I guess they decided that the average modern gamer spends less time with one game and has a lower attention span that gamers used to have. And they're probably right. They chose the middle way, because it's not pure Diablo 2, but it's also not Uncharted or whatever. There is replayability, but less so than Diablo 2, instead attempting to offer a more intense play-through experience rather than aiming for players to spend thousands of hours on the game over 10 years, like Diablo 2.
Yes, we ARE bombarded with the skills in D3 (and yes, that's a lot of short-term pleasure) - and at 60, you can just switch around at will.
Initially, that would make sense to a person without understanding (or appreciation, whichever you prefer) of the nature of long-term appeal.
I mean, why punish people by forcing them to "grind" through the game to try out builds, right?
The problem is that the genre in itself is ALL about "grinding" - if you consider the basic kill, loot, upgrade a grind - and I can assure you that fans of the genre DO NOT consider that a grind.
The criticism of the "old way" - is that the skill system is too punishing for people who don't want to invest in the strategy of planning for a build - and hunting for the loot to match that build.
But the people criticising that way are the people who're not really the core Diablo fans - and it's a big part of why the core Diablo fans are so upset with Diablo 3.
Naturally, if you want to ignore the core fans - and you prefer to keep mainstream players happy in the short-term, that's great. But you're not going to get mainstream players to stay in the long-term. For that, you need core fans.
Again, it's about understanding what you're dealing with - and Blizzard simply didn't.
I don't know whether they should have. Times do change, just look at how popular Diablo 2 is… it's a dilemma. Cater to old-school fans, or today's gamer, or something in between? This is something in between.
No one with any sense would suggest a carbon copy of Diablo 2. That game is ancient - and there are many modern things missing.
I wouldn't want an identical "skill-tree" system. Way too many skills were underpowered and worthless - and it was just constructed without the experience we have today.
I'd prefer something like a talent tree - that, instead of changing the core skill-design, would simply alter your build through passive powers. As in, you'd still have the incentive to customise your character, and you'd still have the incentive to replay the game with the same class - but you wouldn't be overly punished by picking the wrong talents - and Blizzard wouldn't have to change everything at the core.
I know you'd be all pure and correct and go 100% old-school and true to the old games' feeling in the name of touchy-feely artistic reasons and integrity. Reality rarely works that way, though, and even you know it. Also, nostalgia goggles.
I'm sure this is your image of me, as some kind of extreme that you can get a handle on and place in a box. But it's pretty far from what I'm about
