› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Why did Blizzard limit it to four person co-op?

FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 6,057
in Diablo 3
Is it because the game will be released on consoles?  That is the only design decision so far that I'm really not happy about.

Comments

  • expressoexpresso Member UncommonPosts: 2,218
    D3 has always been 4 player co-op I could not imagine 16 people on screen, you can have more than 4 players on console.
  • dubyahitedubyahite Member UncommonPosts: 2,483
    It's just the way Diablo is. It isn't supposed to be a massively multiplayer game.

    Shadow's Hand Guild
    Open recruitment for

    The Secret World - Dragons

    Planetside 2 - Terran Republic

    Tera - Dragonfall Server

    http://www.shadowshand.com

  • Unknown
    They found it was more fun that way. With too many players the screen becomes too cluttered by spell effects.
  • ArChWindArChWind Member UncommonPosts: 1,340

    Originally posted by FrodoFragins

    Is it because the game will be released on consoles?  That is the only design decision so far that I'm really not happy about.

     /hint

    Let's go back in time here to when mercs were not the norm.

    ArChWind — MMORPG.com Forums

    If you are interested in making a MMO maybe visit my page to get a free open source engine.
  • deathangelldeathangell Member CommonPosts: 85
    truthfully its because they want to be able to push pvp later on and 8v8 is 2 much 4 man cells is what u will see 2v2 4v4 tournys
  • zethcarnzethcarn Member UncommonPosts: 1,558

    Originally posted by Axxar

    They found it was more fun that way. With too many players the screen becomes too cluttered by spell effects.

    This and the fact that 8 players never actually played together in a coordinated effort.  You always people in town selling, people afk, and people just looking to be carried.  4 players is just better and easier to balance vs. bosses/elites.

  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 6,057

    Originally posted by zethcarn

    Originally posted by Axxar

    They found it was more fun that way. With too many players the screen becomes too cluttered by spell effects.

    This and the fact that 8 players never actually played together in a coordinated effort.  You always people in town selling, people afk, and people just looking to be carried.  4 players is just better and easier to balance vs. bosses/elites.

    My understanding is that you can't boot people in pugs.  leeching could actually be a bigger problem in some cases as one leecher in D3 = 2 in D2..

     

    I'd definitely be OK with toned down effects and no mercs in cases where there are lots of players in an area.

  • FadedbombFadedbomb Member Posts: 2,081

    Originally posted by zethcarn

    Originally posted by Axxar

    They found it was more fun that way. With too many players the screen becomes too cluttered by spell effects.

    This and the fact that 8 players never actually played together in a coordinated effort.  You always people in town selling, people afk, and people just looking to be carried.  4 players is just better and easier to balance vs. bosses/elites.

    False, we had a 8man cell back in Diablo 2 that loved playing together. Another reason we're dodging Diablo 3 like the plague is the inability for us all to play together again.

     

    That and all the other reasons beaten to death before. Diablo 3 is a sad horse indeed :(.

    The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
    Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.

  • IrusIrus Member Posts: 774

    Because zergs are stupid. There's no point in having 8 players, really. 5 I can undestand. But 8? You're doing something fishy here.

    The game is progressively more difficult to balance the more players you allow. Especially in terms of monster count and the amount of space that a player actually takes up and how much that modifies the flow of the game. That's why everything in WoW is always so big and fat - it's designed for lots of players. DIII isn't. It even has plenty of support for the long forgotten and kicked to the curb solo player.

    Too much stuff is going on on the screen with that many players. Too hectic.

  • Z3R01Z3R01 Member UncommonPosts: 2,426
    THe UI and the limit on Co-op are all due to the decision to make the game on console.

    Playing: Nothing

    Looking forward to: Nothing 


  • IrusIrus Member Posts: 774

    Originally posted by Z3R01

    THe UI and the limit on Co-op are all due to the decision to make the game on console.

    Especially considering they implemented WASD movement. /sarcasm

  • Germaximus_SGermaximus_S Member UncommonPosts: 1,061

    I was also extremely disappointed by the max 4 players. I was like "well hell, i might as well play Dungeon Siege 3" which is a great freakin game.

    But i still love Diablo and i really enjoyed what i played in the beta. Its sad seeing it downgraded from 8 players tho.

    Jeremiah 8:21 I weep for the hurt of my people; I stand amazed, silent, dumb with grief.
    Join me on Twitch Facebook Twitter 

  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 6,057

    Originally posted by monstermmo

    I was also extremely disappointed by the max 4 players. I was like "well hell, i might as well play Dungeon Siege 3" which is a great freakin game.

    But i still love Diablo and i really enjoyed what i played in the beta. Its sad seeing it downgraded from 8 players tho.

    I was under the impression that Dungeon Siege 3 was specifically designed for the console with poor mapping to the PC.

  • XarkoXarko Member EpicPosts: 1,180
    My guess would be its 4 person because of increased difficulty and balance around some tactics during boss fights. Boss's hp in D3 will reset  if you wipe unlike D2 where you could just "bore boss to death" as I call it cuz they HP didnt resest. 8 players would be probably too much of a chaos and zerg.
Sign In or Register to comment.