!if you're ever feeling down, just watch the jig - it's awesome!
|||Quote:if you're ever feeling down, just watch the jig - it's awesome!
Thanx for that, you made me all fuzzy inside
|||This is a new experience for me, this thread has actually kinda ticked me off, which doesn't happen to me very often lol.@Teleportftw
I need to jump in here and point some things out to you, in hopes that you will broaden your outlook.
First, the game is not finished yet and we really don't know what things will be like, and how finished gameplay is going to feel. We cannot prove or dis-prove anything until the game is done and we can play it and point to it to establish opinions. You yourself just pointed out that the game is not done, since you only found 3 skills that required fury, which argues against you not for you.
Second, and tied to the first you are making assumptions. You assume everyone wants to play like you do. You assume that the "fun" skills will require fury, and the not fun skills will not. You also assume that that there is only one way to tactically play a Barbarian.
Third, I will tell you at the end, since this is the part that ticks me off.
If we do take the information that we have so far, and choose to argue one side or the other about the usefulness of Fury, then from the wiki we can come to these conclusions:
1. Most skills do not require Fury.
2. As was stated before, the way you use Fury is up to you, there are skills that allow you to manage how use it.
3. If you want to move from one battle to the next and still be able to use Fury in your first hit you may do so depending on how you have utilized option 2.
4. The dev's intended for D3 gameplay to be more dynamic then D2, with many different skill choices and styles.
Now, in the interest of being fair let me state that those 4 conclusions are in the end, my opinion, and ultimately my assumptions. I believe they are good assumptions, but as such they are free to be challenged.
This brings me back to my third item. Your argument up to this point has consisted of you responding to every counter argument saying "same argument, "workaround"." when no one has ever suggested workaround. This is basically me stepping out of character and telling you to listen to what other people are saying if you want anyone to give any weight to your opinions. Let me repeat, no one suggested their opinion as a workaround, they talked about why they thought Fury was a good idea, and what type of depth it could add to Barbarian gameplay.
If you don't think Fury is a good idea, fine. I am not convinced it is myself, although I lean more to the "yes" then the "no" side. If you don't think the Barbarian will play better, fine, go play a wizard, or stick to D2. If you want to argue that Fury will stink and it will remove tactics then do so, but learn how to argue coherently for your own sake. Edit:I am going to be nice and remove that part, to preachy lol.
-Majaii|||Quote:
This is a new experience for me, this thread has actually kinda ticked me off, which doesn't happen to me very often lol.
@Teleportftw
I need to jump in here and point some things out to you, in hopes that you will broaden your outlook.
First, the game is not finished yet and we really don't know what things will be like, and how finished gameplay is going to feel. We cannot prove or dis-prove anything until the game is done and we can play it and point to it to establish opinions. You yourself just pointed out that the game is not done, since you only found 3 skills that required fury, which argues against you not for you.
Second, and tied to the first you are making assumptions. You assume everyone wants to play like you do. You assume that the "fun" skills will require fury, and the not fun skills will not. You also assume that that there is only one way to tactically play a Barbarian.
Third, I will tell you at the end, since this is the part that ticks me off.
If we do take the information that we have so far, and choose to argue one side or the other about the usefulness of Fury, then from the wiki we can come to these conclusions:
1. Most skills do not require Fury.
2. As was stated before, the way you use Fury is up to you, there are skills that allow you to manage how use it.
3. If you want to move from one battle to the next and still be able to use Fury in your first hit you may do so depending on how you have utilized option 2.
4. The dev's intended for D3 gameplay to be more dynamic then D2, with many different skill choices and styles.
Now, in the interest of being fair let me state that those 4 conclusions are in the end, my opinion, and ultimately my assumptions. I believe they are good assumptions, but as such they are free to be challenged.
This brings me back to my third item. Your argument up to this point has consisted of you responding to every counter argument saying "same argument, "workaround"." when no one has ever suggested workaround. This is basically me stepping out of character and telling you to listen to what other people are saying if you want anyone to give any weight to your opinions. Let me repeat, no one suggested their opinion as a workaround, they talked about why they thought Fury was a good idea, and what type of depth it could add to Barbarian gameplay.
If you don't think Fury is a good idea, fine. I am not convinced it is myself, although I lean more to the "yes" then the "no" side. If you don't think the Barbarian will play better, fine, go play a wizard, or stick to D2. If you want to argue that Fury will stink and it will remove tactics then do so, but learn how to argue coherently for your own sake. Edit:I am going to be nice and remove that part, to preachy lol.
-Majaii
its pretty obvious that 2 tier one skill and one other skill won't be the only things requiring fury. wiki is essentially useless information, if anything it would be smarter to use WOW as a better comparison as its a finished game designed by blizz that uses fury(rage).
I don't assume everyone wants to play like I do, I merely state my opinion. Which is all anyone does. How about this, we get rid of fury AND YOU DON'T PLAY D3? I like that better.
Fury is lame, it removes options, slow the game down, removes kineticism makes the game more a management game(like WOW). it will not be cool or interesting. all my arguments are perfectly coherent, so get off your high horse and get down into the mud w/ the real arguments. I can't stand preachy asses with nothing to add.
oh and btw you don't need to "-majaii" at the end, your name is perfectly readable from your login on the left. figures someone who does that would write a post like you did though.|||Quote:
its pretty obvious that 2 tier one skill and one other skill won't be the only things requiring fury. wiki is essentially useless information
My point exactly, what you see as obvious is merely speculation. How do you know that's how it will be, when it is at odds with everything that we have been given so far?
Quote:
I don't assume everyone wants to play like I do, I merely state my opinion. Which is all anyone does.
Like you saying here what attacks we are going to want to use?
Quote:
I don't personally know which skills don't use fury, my guess nothing u really want doesn't use fury. which in the end leads to the same lame outcome, you have to use ur middling uninteresting attacks, which contrary to your assertions ADD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TACTICALLY, just so u can then use the attacks u really wanna use.
Just cause you assume that you and I want to use the same attacks doesn't make that true. I would much rather use every attack I can then spam one or two all the time.
Quote:
Fury is lame, it removes options, slow the game down, removes kineticism makes the game more a management game(like WOW). it will not be cool or interesting.
What kind of options does it remove? Spamming one skill? Why don't you just build your barbarian to lose his fury slowly then so that you still have some when you go into the next battle? Spam away then, nothing is stopping you. Wait, you can also choose to use a different skill! And speaking of skill, how hard is it to push a button? Like it has been stated, if you want too go ahead, but there is nothing tactical about it. If you would rather face each situation as it's own battle, choosing what skills you are going to use based upon what type of terrain you are in and what kind of monsters you face, well then Fury lets you do that.
Quote:
all my arguments are perfectly coherent, so get off your high horse and get down into the mud w/ the real arguments. I can't stand preachy asses with nothing to add.
oh and btw you don't need to "-majaii" at the end, your name is perfectly readable from your login on the left. figures someone who does that would write a post like you did though.
Lol, your flaming me for signing my post? I guess if it makes you feel better. You didn't respond to my arguments though, just repeated your own. Even when you are now at odds with what you posted a couple of pages back, when you said the cool skills would require fury.|||Quote:
My point exactly, what you see as obvious is merely speculation. How do you know that's how it will be, when it is at odds with everything that we have been given so far?
Like you saying here what attacks we are going to want to use?
Just cause you assume that you and I want to use the same attacks doesn't make that true. I would much rather use every attack I can then spam one or two all the time.
What kind of options does it remove? Spamming one skill? Why don't you just build your barbarian to lose his fury slowly then so that you still have some when you go into the next battle? Spam away then, nothing is stopping you. Wait, you can also choose to use a different skill! And speaking of skill, how hard is it to push a button? Like it has been stated, if you want too go ahead, but there is nothing tactical about it. If you would rather face each situation as it's own battle, choosing what skills you are going to use based upon what type of terrain you are in and what kind of monsters you face, well then Fury lets you do that.
Lol, your flaming me for signing my post? I guess if it makes you feel better. You didn't respond to my arguments though, just repeated your own. Even when you are now at odds with what you posted a couple of pages back, when you said the cool skills would require fury.
well obviously I need to repeat them again since you haven't read the numerous examples I've given.
no fury. you have 1 of 6 skills(blizzard has stated they want 6 competitive skills) that you can use based on enemy makeup, map layout, char design.
fury. you have 1 of 1 skills to use.
I am not, and have never advocated "spamming one skill." and for you to mention that simply shows the incredibly bad and malicious faith you are arguing in. blizzard said they'd give us 6. I want 6 skills that I can use a tactically fast paced and exciting way. not walk up and wackamob every fight at the start, that is lame, boring, and not how diablo games should play.
Lets look at WOW, wow is a management game, you manage rage, you manage your debuffs or your threat. you have rotations, fights last longer. this is from where fury comes from. I don't want diablo to play like that. I want diablo to be a kinetically fast paced game, for the barbarian to be flying around the screen unleashing his badassery all over the map, to take and receive high amts of damage for the decisions to be based upon positioning and composition, and not on rage rotations, or macros.
I believe I have spent atleast 10x as long and been twice as sincere as any of my haters in this thread in explaining my conception of what will make diablo awesome. They have continuously attempted to end arguments with massive snobbery. and this latest person didn't even want to have an argument, merely to make one long flame against me.|||Quote:
well obviously I need to repeat them again since you haven't read the numerous examples I've given.
no fury. you have 1 of 6 skills(blizzard has stated they want 6 competitive skills) that you can use based on enemy makeup, map layout, char design.
fury. you have 1 of 1 skills to use.
I am not, and have never advocated "spamming one skill." and for you to mention that simply shows the incredibly bad and malicious faith you are arguing in. blizzard said they'd give us 6. I want 6 skills that I can use a tactically fast paced and exciting way. not walk up and wackamob every fight at the start, that is lame, boring, and not how diablo games should play.
I'll give you that one, I missed the post you made earlier about using 6 skills. Recall that I have never said I think Fury is Da coolest, I am undecided. So you have a valid argument there.
Quote:
Lets look at WOW, wow is a management game, you manage rage, you manage your debuffs or your threat. you have rotations, fights last longer. this is from where fury comes from. I don't want diablo to play like that. I want diablo to be a kinetically fast paced game, for the barbarian to be flying around the screen unleashing his badassery all over the map, to take and receive high amts of damage for the decisions to be based upon positioning and composition, and not on rage rotations, or macros.
I don't want that either, nor have I argued for that. I agree Diablo should be fast paced, and I didn't like WoW's rage from the little I played it. I am saying that from what we know of Fury for Diablo 3 that's not how it will work. It seems like you should still be able to use tons of skills at the beginning of a battle, and Fury actually makes gameplay quicker by forcing you to move quickly to the next mob if you want to retain the fury that you gained in your last battle. How is that slower?
Let me go into tactics for a bit. You have repeatadly said in this thread that the way you see Fury working is like using concentrate 5 times so you can then whirlwind. That of course would stink and would be slow. That's not the way it is so far though, there are plenty of cool skills that can be used without fury, and some that might require it. In the end I think that is a matter of opinion like stillman said, because some people just want to click a button, and other people enjoy the challenge of not being able to just blast through every fight. From the gameplay video it looks like blizzard is trying to make it so that some situations will require multiple skills to get through them. That calls for tactics. Merely choosing if I want to use skill A or skill B, both of which are viable is not tactics, it is just choosing A or B. Choosing A because B won't work as well till you have done A, which then leaves an opening for B and then maybe C, that is much more tactical.
Quote:
I believe I have spent atleast 10x as long and been twice as sincere as any of my haters in this thread in explaining my conception of what will make diablo awesome. They have continuously attempted to end arguments with massive snobbery. and this latest person didn't even want to have an argument, merely to make one long flame against me.
If you think I am flaming you instead of arguing a point, tell me so, don't just complain about it to whoever else you are now talking to. You have some good points, but try to get them across through brute force, so it does not sound sincere. I think you are sincere, and I respect that, even if that's not how you appear to me from your posts. And I wasn't trying to end an argument, I was starting one since I didn't agree with you. First time I have ever been accused of "massive snobbery" though
|||Quote:"When the Barbarian is not fighting, or not hitting enemies, his Fury steadily fades away, until it drops to nothing several seconds after a battle."
That I don't like at all. I like to take my time when I'm playing. Looking at stuff, comparing weapons etc. I don't like to feel stressed cuz my fury is running out. Would be so much better if the fury gained stays there until you use some skill that costs fury.
Retention- keep your end-battle fury count for a (variable amount of time based upon rank) after battle
not a real skill, just something I think would fit your request nicely|||Quote:
I'll give you that one, I missed the post you made earlier about using 6 skills. Recall that I have never said I think Fury is Da coolest, I am undecided. So you have a valid argument there.
I don't want that either, nor have I argued for that. I agree Diablo should be fast paced, and I didn't like WoW's rage from the little I played it. I am saying that from what we know of Fury for Diablo 3 that's not how it will work. It seems like you should still be able to use tons of skills at the beginning of a battle, and Fury actually makes gameplay quicker by forcing you to move quickly to the next mob if you want to retain the fury that you gained in your last battle. How is that slower?
Let me go into tactics for a bit. You have repeatadly said in this thread that the way you see Fury working is like using concentrate 5 times so you can then whirlwind. That of course would stink and would be slow. That's not the way it is so far though, there are plenty of cool skills that can be used without fury, and some that might require it. In the end I think that is a matter of opinion like stillman said, because some people just want to click a button, and other people enjoy the challenge of not being able to just blast through every fight. From the gameplay video it looks like blizzard is trying to make it so that some situations will require multiple skills to get through them. That calls for tactics. Merely choosing if I want to use skill A or skill B, both of which are viable is not tactics, it is just choosing A or B. Choosing A because B won't work as well till you have done A, which then leaves an opening for B and then maybe C, that is much more tactical.
If you think I am flaming you instead of arguing a point, tell me so, don't just complain about it to whoever else you are now talking to. You have some good points, but try to get them across through brute force, so it does not sound sincere. I think you are sincere, and I respect that, even if that's not how you appear to me from your posts. And I wasn't trying to end an argument, I was starting one since I didn't agree with you. First time I have ever been accused of "massive snobbery" though
I don't want fury to be "frenzy-like" either, where u have to go like a bolt between battles to keep up ur advantage, I hated that. I pick up a lot of items and stuff and the few times I tried frenzy it infuriated me(haha).
having a rotation is not more interesting, it really really isn't. and removing options IS NOT MORE TACTICAL. like I pointed out numerous times.
nonfury beginning, I can use 1 of 6 skills to demolish my enemy depending on positioning, composition of enemy, layout, etc.
fury beginning, I can use 1 of 1 skills.
the numbers may change slightly but INEVITABLY fury will have to choke off the skills you really want to use to force you to use inferior and almost certainly less interesting skills. I want 6 real skills that are cool and function with different gameplay mechanics. not a couple skills I really wna use and some lameass ones that I'm forced to use to begin every fight.
No comments:
Post a Comment