Can we PLEASE take off the rose tinted glasses?

[Sulle]

D3's matchmaking system blows, D2's was much better and more friendly

Ohhh man, if there was ever a statement more capable than #1 on this list of making me think you didn't play D2 this is it. What do you mean D2's was better? Do you remember what joining a public game consisted of? Scan the list hoping that people aren't lying about their titles. Select your game and join it praying that you a) the objective has not yet been completed and b) you manage to join the correct party before they manage to complete it. A huge percentage of public games were known as runs. Baal-1, Chaos-2, Trist-3, Tombs-4, Cows-5 etc etc, which were specialized games meant for maxing xp gain because of the retarded systems that made you reroll every time you got slightly better gear or made a mistake.

Wolfpaq the matchmaking system is made primarily to make things easier for console players. Itīs just made for casual players, who want to play for awhile without commiting themselves too much, so itīs nothing spectacular in fact itīs an old system made for i.e. first person shooter games, so imo they could have been more creative and made something different and new given the resources they have.

The matchmaking system will just be quicker and easier, but will it be a better system and make it more fun by removing choice? I donīt think so, because d2 was extremely fun and I never had problems with the system in it.

[Zorrah]

You know, XXXXXXX feature is a console feature, should have been one of the other phrases that made the list. There's circumstantial evidence that DIII is coming to console, so every little feature people don't like, someone pops up and says, "oh, it's because it's a console game, lol". Now, Diablo has never really been that complex. It would be a lot easier to believe that Blizzard was trying to make the console and PC experience as close as humanly possible if there ever was an official console announcement. Most of the console talk still reeks of tinfoilhattery, whether a port to consoles is in the works or not.

[Sulle]

Zorah yes because writing and creating games on a console is so much easier than a keyboard right?

I am a realist and I see things that make sense and so many of the UI changes, chat channel, matchmaking system ect. would make sense from a console playerīs point of view. Modern shooter games have the same systems implemented and are made for consoles aswell, because thereīs a lot of potential buyers from that area, so from a business aspect, it makes sense to want to make it for an audience as wide as possible, which is what blizzard are doing with this game. You have to be a bit naive if you donīt think it will come on a console.

[Buu]

IMO, the future of D3 bartering is something like D2jsp. You will bet able to get better deals and save 15% AH fee. GAH will be only for crap. All the best items will go through third-party sites.

One of the best features of D2jsp is an ability to NEGOTIATE the deal. This completely not possible with GAH or RMAH.

I too enjoyed bartering, which is why I'm planning on having a trade list on this site. I know there are a number of people here who dislike the RMAH and will keep their items out of it.

[Zorrah]

A console port is not driving every design decision. Diablo and Warcraft 2 both had console ports. Add to that, Borderlands was created as a console game and you can create named games on that and it has a game search feature similar to Diablo II.

One of the design decisions that people swear was for console users was the decision to go with 6 skills as opposed to 7. I can't see a 7 skill cap as being that difficult to swing on a console (8 would be easy, 12 using 2 shoulder buttons as shift keys would be very plausible).

[beingmused]

Wolfpaq the matchmaking system is made primarily to make things easier for console players.

Whose *** did you pull that from?

The matchmaking system will just be quicker and easier, but will it be a better system and make it more fun by removing choice? I donīt think so, because d2 was extremely fun and I never had problems with the system in it.

OK, let's say you log onto D3 and none of your friends are online in games, so you have no one to quick-join...and you want to play with some strangers. What do you want when you're looking for a game? To join a game that's on the same quest you're on, right?

The problem with D2's system was that you rarely could achieve that, because the names of the games were either vague and unhelpful, were outdated (most of the time when you joined a game that said "a2q1" or something, they had already finished that quest), or were deliberately lying (people wanting to get more people in the game but not play with them). D3's join a public game brings you to the quest you're on, no muss and no fuss. What purpose would having named games serve beyond that? No PVP or dueling (in games), so no need to look for specific games for that. You won't be doing runs of just one boss over and over again, so no need to look for those kinds of games. If you for some reason want to have a game where you do something other than just play, then you can just make friends elsewhere and create private games for that purpose.

There is no possible reason for wanting named games, or anything close to D2's system - except for misguided nostalgia.

[Raesene]

There is no possible reason for wanting named games, or anything close to D2's system - except for misguided nostalgia.

I agree with everything you said, but I think the reason some people want named games is to be able to create trade games. Which to me is a huge reason not to have them. They would just fill the game list with spam.

[HardRock]

I think trade games will happen eventually since the AH's item limit can be easily reached. I still don't see why creating trade games would be that hard. Just create a game on any quest and then invite the buyers or accept their invitation request.

[beingmused]

I agree with everything you said, but I think the reason some people want named games is to be able to create trade games. Which to me is a huge reason not to have them. They would just fill the game list with spam.

Yes, that is true. "Trade games" always seemed incredibly inefficient in D2, and made trying to find a real game all the more difficult. Since we won't have duped SOJs being the currency of traders, if you want to avoid the gold or real money AH, then you would have a hard time joining a random game and expecting to have something they would want in exchange for a rare item. Trading via the forums makes more sense for D3 than trade games would.

[Raesene]

I think trade games will happen eventually since the AH's item limit can be easily reached. I still don't see why creating trade games would be that hard. Just create a game on any quest and then invite the buyers or accept their invitation request.

I'm not saying people won't form games to perform private trades, but what you are describing is much different than putting up a trade game and waiting for random people to come in and buy your stuff.