many updates of awesomeness
even if you don't twitter it's chalk full of delights :P

---

Q u o t e:
many updates of awesomeness
even if you don't twitter it's chalk full of delights :P

---

copy+paste updates

---

Q u o t e:
many updates of awesomeness
even if you don't twitter it's chalk full of delights :P

---

Not to be too much of a slang nerd but that's supposed to be 'chock-full'

www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19980122

I suggest instead going to fan sites, which will read the twitter feeds and add interesting background info or commentary.

Fan sites > Twitter

---

Q u o t e:


Not to be too much of a slang nerd but that's supposed to be 'chock-full'

www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19980122

---

oh thank you :P

---

Q u o t e:


I suggest instead going to fan sites, which will read the twitter feeds and add interesting background info or commentary.

Fan sites > Twitter

---

i never see anyone talk about what goes on on twitter actually

---

Q u o t e:


oh thank you :P



i never see anyone talk about what goes on on twitter actually

---

Maybe you don't try hard enough

http://www.diii.net/blog/comments/diablo-twitter-blizzard-wants-your-resource-system-per-class-ideas/

---

Q u o t e:
Maybe you don't try hard enough

http://www.diii.net/blog/comments/diablo-twitter-blizzard-wants-your-resource-system-per-class-ideas/

---

Except, you can be led to wrong interpretations as your afore mentioned example.

What Blizzard actually asked was just what you thought about different-resources vs mana-for-all, not what the resources-type should be. In diii.net though they misunderstood and if you go and read the comments on that page you can see how the entire discussion there is pretty much worthless (to this particular Blizzard question) and how it induces wrong readings on the matter by the playerbase (from the use of Twitter by Blizzard to the actual intentions of the D3 devs with this new resource system).

What was tweeted was:

---

Q u o t e:
Diablo #DailyDiablo We’re looking to give each class in Diablo III a unique resource system, instead of everyone using mana. Thoughts?

---

Ambiguous yes, but easily understood as thoughts on the devs choice on the use of unique resources as opposed to what kind of resources.

Also by just reading it on fansites you are relinquishing your right to give the asked feedback, so do not complain then that Blizzard does not listen or that the game is not coming out as you would like.

I like Mana.

Multiple resource types for every character. If the barbarian, wizard, and monk are getting their own systems, you can't leave the Witch Doctor w/ the old mana system from the last 2 games.

---

Q u o t e:


Except, you can be led to wrong interpretations as your afore mentioned example.

What Blizzard actually asked was just what you thought about different-resources vs mana-for-all, not what the resources-type should be. In diii.net though they misunderstood and if you go and read the comments on that page you can see how the entire discussion there is pretty much worthless (to this particular Blizzard question) and how it induces wrong readings on the matter by the playerbase (from the use of Twitter by Blizzard to the actual intentions of the D3 devs with this new resource system).

---

No you are flat out wrong by saying all that discussion is worthless. They have already decided they are going in the direction of different resources. The useless discussion would be discussing "Yea different resources are cool" vs " I like only Mana as a resource".

The only useful feedback Blizzard would gain is from a discussion on what classes should use what type of resource and how it should work.

It would also be blatantly obvious those who giving ideas are in favour of the different resource system.

---

Q u o t e:
What was tweeted was:

---

Q u o t e:
Diablo #DailyDiablo We’re looking to give each class in Diablo III a unique resource system, instead of everyone using mana. Thoughts?

---

---

This is shown in the article.....

---

Q u o t e:
Ambiguous yes, but easily understood as thoughts on the devs choice on the use of unique resources as opposed to what kind of resources.

---

Yes I agree somewhat ambiguous, but ambiguity means its open to interpretation not closed, that would be explicit. As you can see it is also easily understood that they want opinions on different resource system

I won't disagree that statements can be misinterpreted, but that only feeds the discussion.

I find the fan sites still better.
1) You still see the same Twitter feed
2) You get an amalgamation of information (mostly none mundane) in one source instead of Twitter + Multiple Battle.net Forums + Blizzard's website + Diablo 3's webiste + Every gaming site that may have info.
3) It promotes a deeper level of discussion on subjects
4) Usually better discussions, which aren't clouded or distracted by the colour Blue.

---

Q u o t e:
Also by just reading it on fansites you are relinquishing your right to give the asked feedback, so do not complain then that Blizzard does not listen or that the game is not coming out as you would like.

---

I don't see how that would relinquish my "right" to give feedback, nor do I care how you see it though.

I don't complain about Blizzard not listening, where are you going with this?

---

Q u o t e:
That was an interesting interpretation of the tweet. We're not looking for ideas, just general thoughts on the fact that we're planning on multiple resource types.

Oh well.

---

That's why Twitter is ummm yea....... I leave it there.

P.S I know I have some unnatural bias against this (Twitter) website.

---

Q u o t e:
We're not looking for ideas, just general thoughts on the fact that we're planning on multiple resource types.

---

Multiple resource types is a good idea, Barbarian's 'Fury' system was a step made in the right direction, let's hope the other ideas will be as cool as this one :)

---

Q u o t e:


Multiple resource types is a good idea, Barbarian's 'Fury' system was a step made in the right direction, let's hope the other ideas will be as cool as this one :)

---

I dont think multiple resources systems are a good idea or a bad idea.

I do think its an unnecessary idea, and doesnt add variety in a meaningful way. You can argue that it adds various gameplay differences and that this constitutes variety, but this is FORCED(archetypical) variety, and thus pigeonholes rather than opens up. On top of that, there are plenty of other avenues to provide variety (even the forced kind) without requiring what would seem like an unnecessary increase in balancing and itemization tweaking.

What I like about having multiple resource systems is the potential. It's all about how the resources is expended and replenished, and with more systems there are more possible mechanics. This greater variety will (hopefully) add extra flavour to each class because the resource mechanics should dictate certain differences in how the class is played (and that's before you even start to think about skills...).

---

Q u o t e:



I dont think multiple resources systems are a good idea or a bad idea.

I do think its an unnecessary idea, and doesnt add variety in a meaningful way. You can argue that it adds various gameplay differences and that this constitutes variety, but this is FORCED(archetypical) variety, and thus pigeonholes rather than opens up. On top of that, there are plenty of other avenues to provide variety (even the forced kind) without requiring what would seem like an unnecessary increase in balancing and itemization tweaking.

---

What about innovation? Trying to create something new and original? Sure, the "If it ain't broke . . ." line could be used, but if that were the case then we all would still be playing Pong.

I say give them a chance. I personally like the idea of unique resource systems for every class. I like the idea of having each class play completely different (both in skills and resources)

Unnecessary? Perhaps. More difficult to implement/balance? Likely. But if done well and they pull it off, I think the end result will be a better game.

---

Q u o t e:


What about innovation? Trying to create something new and original? Sure, the "If it ain't broke . . ." line could be used, but if that were the case then we all would still be playing Pong.

I say give them a chance. I personally like the idea of unique resource systems for every class. I like the idea of having each class play completely different (both in skills and resources)

Unnecessary? Perhaps. More difficult to implement/balance? Likely. But if done well and they pull it off, I think the end result will be a better game.

---

Innovation for innovations sake has ruined more games than I care to speak of.

By this I mean things which were probably somewhat intriguing at some point in the brainstorming cycle, but in praticality are more complicated than fun or interesting, but which make it into the final game because of some god awful thing which I to this day fail to understand. Probably for lack of experience in a coporate game environment. Whatever it is, im sure its the marketers fault.

---

Q u o t e:


Innovation for innovations sake has ruined more games than I care to speak of.

---

Indeed. In truth, I was for the most part playing devil's advocate.

I do, however, believe that the mana system in D2 can be improved upon, as it did have several flaws. Are individual unique resources the best answer? Who knows? I cannot really say until I know more about each one.

The part I was serious about was I do like the idea of having a different resource for each class just so they actually feel like a different class. When you take something like Diablo 1 (or many other games) where every class can use the same spells, armor, weapons, and so on - they are all essentially the same exact class, but just have different stat bonuses and models.

Yeah, myself I think that sometimes it might be nice to have alternative "resources" to give a class a different feel - for instance the barbarian's fury is, I think, a good application of that.

On the other hand I'm not sure there's a good reason to give every class something different. I wouldn't really lose sleep over having the witch doctor and wizard both use mana. They're both pretty magic-y classes, and I'm not sure there's a lot of meaningful diversity you can find in ways to cast spells. I can think of D&D's memorization/slot system, but limited spells per day doesn't really fit the Diablo hack-and-slash model too well. You could make them different in name only, but sooner or later you're going to run out of names for "magic points".