Support NeoGAF

[AllIsOneIsNone]

I'm sorry but if you cant check a box in the menu or even find it you prob should not be choosing your skills freely in the first place.

Im trying to be as civil as possible but theres a point where you just have to draw a line about whats reasonable and complaining about Blizzard holding hands but obviously not being able to walk on your own feet is that line.

I think people's complaints are warranted. In some ways such as difficulty/beginning quests the beta realllly holds your hand and tells you what is what. The discrepancy there is that a necessary component of the game (2 actually, the advanced tooltips as well) were not set by default.

I have no idea what "elective skills" means just by looking at the option, and I don't want to go through the options and check/uncheck everything to see if it changes a core part of the game. I initially thought "advanced tooltips" meant it gives you even more information if you're a newcomer, not necessary stats that every veteran diablo player needs.

The point is, the beta led a lot of people to believe A, when really B. Thats what people were concerned about, thats all.

 

[FieryBalrog]

I've just decided to categorically dismiss all discussion of play balance, as no one will know the number of viable builds until several months after the game is released. The argument that is used to describe why Diablo 2 is not as balanced as it initially appears is as applicable to 3: The presence of a large number of options is irrelevant if many of those options are non-viable. Seeing as we've only played up to level 13 (a level at which, in Diablo 2, basically any skill build is viable) there is basically no way to determine in either direction whether any given skill build will hold up in endgame, which is the only place where it actually matters.

I agree, but there are certain big improvements which increase viability. Skill damage keying off weapon damage is huge.

 

[FieryBalrog]

Haven't been keeping up completely with the game, but how exactly does character customization work? I remember hearing about the rune system being how you would change your character but someone told me yesterday that this isn't so anymore?

Basically, during leveling, you unlock skill slots. At level 19 you will have all 6. You fill those with whatever spells you want. You can swap out one skill for another, but there is a cooldown. You are free to stick to one build or experiment. At end-game, you get a stacking MF buff for not swapping out skills or runes or exiting the game, so you will most likely want to stick to a single build per play session. You are also encouraged to kill champion mobs and elite mobs before getting to an Act Boss.

Runes are like skills now, you just unlock them as you level.

Stats you will customize with gems and gear. Gems are craftable, and have a much bigger impact on stats than in D2. Your items will also play into your build.

 

[Fallout-NL]

However, his post describes the hype curve of Diablo 2 exactly. People just don't remember because it's 2012.

The bitching wasn't on forums as much because it was the year 2000, but I remember magazines widely complaining about the graphics, about how outdated the combat was, and I remember people bitching so much about the horrible server downtimes on release.

Seriously, Diablo 2 servers were worse than WoW's on release. I had to play on Europe because US West and East crashed constantly, you couldn't log in, or your games would freeze on that "door opening into the light" loading screen. It was still bad on Europe.

That's a bit of a generalization.

Twelve years have done nothing to diminish my memories of summer '00. Diablo 2 didn't disappoint the slightest bit. It's the fondest gaming related memory I have.

 

[FieryBalrog]

That's a bit of a generalization.

Twelve years have done nothing to diminish my memories of summer '00. Diablo 2 didn't disappoint the slightest bit. It's the fondest gaming related memory I have.

It's one of the fondest I have too, but it doesn't change the issues at launch. I actually think Lord of Destruction is a way better game than vanilla D2.

 

[Fugu]

I agree, but there are certain big improvements which increase viability. Skill damage keying off weapon damage is huge.

I'm not sure how that makes anything more viable compared to having weapon damage added to skill damage; melee characters hit pretty damn hard in Diablo 2 and are only useless in post-1.10 because they revised life leech to make it impossible to survive off of.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

I agree, but there are certain big improvements which increase viability. Skill damage keying off weapon damage is huge.

I really think the whole equipment-centric premise of the hero building gameplay is a way to encourage people to buy gear off the auction house which of course Blizzard makes extra money from the comission.

It's a genius business strategy but not sure if I agree with it. Despite that I had fun with the beta but still not convinced to buy on Day 1.

 

[Trickster]

what? .... why did nobody mention that anywhere.
was it in the game options or where would you set that?

It was in the options yes. And I don't think anyone outside of blizzard knows why they thought it wouldn't be worth letting players know about it, when they start playing.

 

[Wolfie5]

Things I had to explain when I played with my friends:

-Right click to identify items

-Go to options _> gameplay and toggle the options that you want, make sure Elective mode is ticked.

-Even if you are a wizard, wear a crossbow if that weapon is the strongest you have, since weapon damage increases the DPS you make with your skills/spells.

-Depending on which class you are, one attribute increases your DPS:
Strength: Barbarian
Dexterity: DH and Monk
Intelligence: WD and Wizard

If you want to increase your DPS, you get gear that increases above attribute depending on class you are playing with.

-Always pick up items that are not white/grey since at worst case you can salvage material and craft new items at blacksmith.

-Items you put in chest can be shared by your other characters.

-Items that are dropped are individual, meaning what you see can only be picked up by you.

 

[TheYanger]

I'm not sure how that makes anything more viable compared to having weapon damage added to skill damage; melee characters, Wearing gear you farmed on non-melee characters, hit pretty damn hard in Diablo 2 and are only useless in post-1.10 because they revised life leech to make it impossible to survive off of.

Fixed that for you. Make sense now?

 

[~Kinggi~]

Things I had to explain when I played with my friends:

-Right click to identify items

-Go to options _> gameplay and toggle the options that you want, make sure Elective mode is ticked.

-Even if you are a wizard, wear a crossbow if that weapon is the strongest you have, since weapon damage increases the DPS you make with your skills/spells.

-Depending on which class you are, one attribute increases your DPS:
Strength: Barbarian
Dexterity: DH and Monk
Intelligence: WD and Wizard

If you want to increase your DPS, you get gear that increases above attribute depending on class you are playing with.

-Always pick up items that are not white/grey since at worst case you can salvage material and craft new items at blacksmith.

-Items you put in chest can be shared by your other characters.

lol, didnt know that about identifying items. Also the dps thing.

 

[FieryBalrog]

I'm not sure how that makes anything more viable compared to having weapon damage added to skill damage; melee characters hit pretty damn hard in Diablo 2 and are only useless in post-1.10 because they revised life leech to make it impossible to survive off of.

It makes the skills much easier to balance than a flat damage system. Especially for casters, which is all I played in D2. F

 

[Fallout-NL]

It's one of the fondest I have too, but it doesn't change the issues at launch. I actually think Lord of Destruction is a way better game than vanilla D2.

Same game F.B. . LoD merely manages to improve on what is already one of mankind's greatest achievements.

 

[Fugu]

Fixed that for you. Make sense now?

Don't put words in my mouth, particularly non-factual words. I've soloed the game dozens of times on characters that are dependant on weapon damage. Tell me a javazon can't play untwinked. Please.

It makes the skills much easier to balance than a flat damage system. Especially for casters, which is all I played in D2. F

I don't really see how the spells themselves are that difficult to balance, particularly across the same class (sorceresses are viable with basically anything except for the redundant spells like firebolt and ice bolt). There are cases in Diablo 2 where they clearly didn't try (frozen arrow hasn't really been viable since 1.09 and the fire arrow skills haven't ever been viable; see also both of the flame traps, the boulder skills, both varieties of inferno, et cetera) but they could have fixed many of these by adding an extra zero to their damage; that's not a flaw inherent to the system and could still very much happen in Diablo 3 if Blizzard doesn't regulate the damage of attacks compared to how many targets they hit (for two extremes of how this can go in Diablo 2, consult frozen orb and frost nova).

 

[Valnen]

I can't wait for the amount of this:

that will be happening on May 15th and beyond. Sure, there will still be some valid complaints, but I imagine a lot more crow eating than anything else. Especially having played with Hazaro and others in the extra content that was only available for a weekend before getting patched out.

Yup. When I get to Nightmare, I might do a stream for the people who feel the beta was too easy. Maybe from the beginning to the skeleton king, so that those who thought the beta was too easy can see the difference.

 

[DTKT]

Terribly sorry to intrude but.

I really don't get the dead crow in a plate. :|

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

Terribly sorry to intrude but.

I really don't get the dead crow in a plate. :|

you know...eating crow.

 

[MasLegio]

just played diablo 2 quickly and realized you cannot switch weapon sets in Diablo 3 or did I just miss that completely in the beta?

 

[Zona]

"Eating crow" is a U.S. colloquial idiom, meaning humiliation by admitting wrongness or having been proved wrong after taking a strong position.
-Wikipedia

 

[DTKT]

"Eating crow" is a U.S. colloquial idiom, meaning humiliation by admitting wrongness or having been proved wrong after taking a strong position.
-Wikipedia

You silly americans.

Thanks.

 

[Fugu]

Yup. When I get to Nightmare, I might do a stream for the people who feel the beta was too easy. Maybe from the beginning to the skeleton king, so that those who thought the beta was too easy can see the difference.

Have you actually played it? I'm going to be playing hardcore right out of the gate and I'm curious to know if the game is actually that much more difficult and how much of that difficulty can be ameliorated by being over-leveled or by reading the description of monsters before you fight them.

 

[99%]

I think people's complaints are warranted. In some ways such as difficulty/beginning quests the beta realllly holds your hand and tells you what is what. The discrepancy there is that a necessary component of the game (2 actually, the advanced tooltips as well) were not set by default.

I have no idea what "elective skills" means just by looking at the option, and I don't want to go through the options and check/uncheck everything to see if it changes a core part of the game. I initially thought "advanced tooltips" meant it gives you even more information if you're a newcomer, not necessary stats that every veteran diablo player needs.

The point is, the beta led a lot of people to believe A, when really B. Thats what people were concerned about, thats all.

Oh I agree that the explanation and placement have to be improved. I didnt know about advanced tooltips till a few weeks ago I think.

I just found it funny to see some people complain about it while complaining about holding hands etc

 

[Freki]

Have you actually played it? I'm going to be playing hardcore right out of the gate and I'm curious to know if the game is actually that much more difficult and how much of that difficulty can be ameliorated by being over-leveled or by reading the description of monsters before you fight them.

For the "I tried to count how often this was posted but I lost track" time

 

[elfinke]

What I find really interesting about a game such as Diablo is how lots of different people can take completely different things away from each character. How I felt completely unempowered and like I was doing something wrong with the Wizard class yet others feel like gods of destruction. How I feel like a spry, tactical death machine with the Demon Hunter yet others feel like a weak fool.

And really, all this is only when we're forced into sharing the same builds. When we're floating around level 30 and being able to completely change the way these characters work should we so wish, how we're all going to have opinions of each class that are even more wildly divergent.

Such possibilities and playstyle diversity is fascinating to me, and I cannot even begin to imagine the work Blizzard have to do to balance these things.

Great post, nice observations!

This link from kyubajin a couple of pages back really does a great job of explaining it.

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/3811455085

Oh man, I have been spamming that Dontinquire link everywhere lately. I hope parts of it get a run in the OT, as it explains the changes in character build and the change to gear dependency so well.

Yes, there will be builds.

A build in Diablo 3 will consist of 5 things:
1) Skill choices (which 6 you will use - that is the core of your build
2) Supporting skill choices (which passives you take to make sense with that core)
3) Designing your gear around your build (what stats to prefer over what, which items you go that improve certain skills compared to a general raw damage increase instead, etc)
4) Gemming around your skill choices (around your core) - in Inferno+ characters, the gems that you use will worth SHITTON of money, so it is not child's play
5) If Blizzard somehow makes your hirelings just 1-2 percent relevant to Inferno gameplay, then you will need to gear/"talent" them up specifically for your build.

Points 3 and 3 are being overlooked by a large portion of the betas player base I think (which is fair enough, the beta was open to test the servers and such, not get UI or gameplay feedback. It rubbed some people the wrong way because of that). Gear will be so much more important this time around (if you want to maximise your preferred skill sets potential anyway), as it seems that stat modifiers will be in the many hundreds when all is said and done, compared to D2.

This explanation makes me far more confident with skill changes. skill customization

I find Jay Wilson very enjoyable to listen to. This is also a great video that needs to be in the OT, or at least cliff noted as it again explains what Blizz found during testing. He doesn't go into the greater details of how Blizz actually found there was greater customisation, more builds and more viability amongst their testing player base once they got down to removing skill points (and the very important decision to give space for only 6 active skills) and automating level ups.

 

[Fallout-NL]

just played diablo 2 quickly and realized you cannot switch weapon sets in Diablo 3 or did I just miss that completely in the beta?

Yeah, that's gone too.

 

[Freki]

Yeah, that's gone too.

And for a good reason again - It's like Blizzard has some kind of deeper understanding of their game...

At the moment it is. The confusion it creates for players is a good point really in my opinion. From my time in tech support it was a common enough issue that we had pre-written responses to send to people to help inform them of where their weapons went. BUT that said it’s not a problem that’s completely without a solution, so while it’s a decent argument it’s sort of weak because it could probably be addressed somehow.

One good reason why it’s not a feature we like the idea of is that it adds a new type of play complexity that we don’t want to layer on top of those that we already have. We’re creating the game, the skills, the movement speed, kill rates, skill runes, and all other combat related mechanics and features to fit as tightly together as possible. Throwing in weapon swapping forces that tightening/balancing to take it into account. Only thing is that it’s not a clear cut feature. You either know how to game it – or you don’t. So it creates a separation of players that isn’t based on use of the character and skills but doing this weird little trick and swapping back and forth between weapons at specific times. It becomes a necessity to remain effective or as a strong opponent, and we believe the combat has enough going for it that it doesn’t need difficult to explain and understand features like weapon swapping.

I know this is probably the wrong audience to try to make that argument to, because most of you are on the winning end. But trust us that there will be plenty of separation between you and the noobs to show how awesome you are without weapon swapping.

You also have the issues of it just being used for storage, which feels super cheesy. Or as a means to game MF by swapping in weapons to get 0mgz uber dropz.

 

[FinKL]

For the "I tried to count how often this was posted but I lost track" time

Omg, I just saw this video and I've been following D3 hardcore since Feb. when BestBuy supposedly leaked a release date. Super stoked

Why doesn't this video play while you're installing the beta in the launcher updating screen???

 

[Fugu]

For the "I tried to count how often this was posted but I lost track" time

I've already seen this. I was asking for his opinion, not Blizzard's.

What they describe in this video, by the way, is word-for-word applicable to Diablo 2 and I've basically only been killed by other players in hardcore. Assuming you are untwinked, you cannot run into boss packs on nightmare or above or you'll probably be killed (unless they're like teleporter stone skin or whatever). But if I don't run into boss packs, they're not going to kill me. The reason this video doesn't answer any questions for me is because I'm a lot better at Diablo than most of their audience is.

And for a good reason again - It's like Blizzard has some kind of deeper understanding of their game...

I think that's a terrible response. They mentioned people exploiting weapon switch, the closest thing to which I could think of is using +oskill items like CTA, and that's barely an exploit seeing as there are so few buff skills in Diablo 2 that it is literally really only relevant to the three skills that CTA boosts. It's also got absolutely nothing to do with play balance, seeing as players can already switch weapons on the fly in Diablo 3, albeit in a more cumbersome manner. A more legitimate argument they could make is that most people didn't take advantage of it in Diablo 2 so there was no reason to have it in 3; that would have at least been factual.

EDIT: I didn't even see the last sentence, which is just immature for the implication that people who exploited their design decisions were internet nerds or whatever.

 

[Fallout-NL]

And for a good reason again

They have excellent explanations for all those decisions, yes. But it's a fine line between streamlining and oversimplifying the game. And until I've confirmed this for myself, I'm still not sure what it is they're doing.

It's like Blizzard has some kind of deeper understanding of their game...

That, or they counted the amount of buttons on a controller.

 

[chris-013]

I've already seen this. I was asking for his opinion, not Blizzard's.

What they describe in this video, by the way, is word-for-word applicable to Diablo 2 and I've basically only been killed by other players in hardcore. Assuming you are untwinked, you cannot run into boss packs on nightmare or above or you'll probably be killed (unless they're like teleporter stone skin or whatever). But if I don't run into boss packs, they're not going to kill me. The reason this video doesn't answer any questions for me is because I'm a lot better at Diablo than most of their audience is.

Like you said some elite packs have teleporter, vortex, jailer, waller, ect... to keep you from running. (Last I heard they can have 4-5 mods at the same time... a bit crazy)

We will see but I think HC in D3 will be a lot harder than D2 because you can't run inside a teleport or spam a full rejuv pot.

 

[Fugu]

Like you said some elite packs have teleporter, vortex, jailer, waller, ect... to keep you from running. (Last I heard they can have 4-5 mods at the same time... a bit crazy)

We will see but I think HC in D3 will be a lot harder than D2 because you can't run inside a teleport or spam a full rejuv pot.

The change to pots makes things a little different but they're still pretty beefy.

Teleporter certainly doesn't keep me from running. There's also a lot more things that stun or slow enemies in 3 than there are in Diablo 2.

 

[FieryBalrog]

The cooldown on pots, the teleport change and the TP change will alter high-end Diablo play completely.

And probably make it harder. At least from a design perspective. There's a great interview with J Wilson early on where he talks about how D2 basically had to slam a brick wall in your face to stop you because you were otherwise invincible, so you had shit like the undead dolls in Act 3 or the gloams in Act 4 which were otherwise incredibly easy but for certain instant death mechanics.

Not to mention the hilarity of melee characters dealing with iron maiden in Hell for like 7 years.

 

[Freki]

The change to pots makes things a little different but they're still pretty beefy.

Teleporter certainly doesn't keep me from running. There's also a lot more things that stun or slow enemies in 3 than there are in Diablo 2.

A Teleporter/Jailer/Molten/Vortex will - and killing you in the process.

 

[Valnen]

Have you actually played it? I'm going to be playing hardcore right out of the gate and I'm curious to know if the game is actually that much more difficult and how much of that difficulty can be ameliorated by being over-leveled or by reading the description of monsters before you fight them.

No I haven't actually played nightmare as I'm not a Blizzard employee, but after having watched videos of the areas after the skeleton king and how much damage they do I fully expect to lose a lot more hp in Nightmare than I have been in normal even if I am careful from unavoidable damage like archers and stuff. I expect the room just before the skeleton king with all the archers will actually be quite tough for example.

 

[Fugu]

The cooldown on pots, the teleport change and the TP change will alter high-end Diablo play completely.

And probably make it harder. At least from a design perspective. There's a great interview with J Wilson early on where he talks about how D2 basically had to slam a brick wall in your face to stop you because you were otherwise invincible, so you had shit like the undead dolls in Act 3 or the gloams in Act 4 which were otherwise incredibly easy but for certain instant death mechanics.

Not to mention the hilarity of melee characters dealing with iron maiden in Hell for like 7 years.

TPs don't have much of a presence in hardcore because they're so dangerous. The bigger change is the fact that you can't spontaneously leave the game, and it's that that I think will add more difficulty to the game than anything Blizzard could ever do. I'm just legitimately curious as to what makes nightmare/hell different in this game compared to Diablo 2, because that video doesn't indicate much.

Did J. Wilson actually use the example of gloams? Because that's a bug. For them to pass that off as intentional is hilarious.

Iron Madien was a major problem, yeah. I'm glad that doesn't happen any more.

A Teleporter/Jailer/Molten/Vortex will - and killing you in the process.

I wouldn't engage this enemy, just like I wouldn't have engaged an MSLE when that was still dangerous or an FECE with a ranged attack. As long as it's still presumed that I'm going to fight the enemy fairly (which I won't, seeing as the game gives me all of the information I need to know about the enemy before I fight them) I don't see how it can be argued that the game is that much more difficult. If you're saying then the enemy is just going to pop up and kill me instantly, then that's not difficulty, that's Sonic Heroes-style death pits. And that'll send me back to Diablo 2 in a hurry.

No I haven't actually played nightmare as I'm not a Blizzard employee, but after having watched videos of the areas after the skeleton king and how much damage they do I fully expect to lose a lot more hp in Nightmare than I have been in normal even if I am careful from unavoidable damage like archers and stuff. I expect the room just before the skeleton king with all the archers will actually be quite tough for example.

I'm sceptical of this kind of stuff because I don't know what level these characters are, how built they are, or how sane the people controlling them are.

 

[TheYanger]

TPs don't have much of a presence in hardcore because they're so dangerous. The bigger change is the fact that you can't spontaneously leave the game, and it's that that I think will add more difficulty to the game than anything Blizzard could ever do. I'm just legitimately curious as to what makes nightmare/hell different in this game compared to Diablo 2, because that video doesn't indicate much.

Did J. Wilson actually use the example of gloams? Because that's a bug. For them to pass that off as intentional is hilarious.

Iron Madien was a major problem, yeah. I'm glad that doesn't happen any more.

I don't think he said it was intentional, but Blizz let it slide forever because it actually made the game challenging and it was totally beatable, so at what point is it not a bug?
Lots of bugs become features by virtue in plenty of games. (You could just as easily call rocket jumping a bug, but it added to the game rather than detracting so it became a virtue. The difference between 'bug' and 'quirk' of the system is basically semantics).

 

[Fugu]

I don't think he said it was intentional, but Blizz let it slide forever because it actually made the game challenging and it was totally beatable, so at what point is it not a bug?
Lots of bugs become features by virtue in plenty of games. (You could just as easily call rocket jumping a bug, but it added to the game rather than detracting so it became a virtue. The difference between 'bug' and 'quirk' of the system is basically semantics).

I'm not arguing that bugs can't make games better (I play Melee). I'm saying that it's silly for them to say that they placed spontaneous death traps in the game on purpose, when gloams are, in fact, very weak if you ignore the fact that Blizzard accidentally added their melee attack to each hit of the lightning.

If I were to formulate a top five of most dangerous things in Diablo 2, the only enemy on the list that isn't dangerous because of a bug is normal difficulty venom lords.

Also, as long as we're discussing it, the burning soul bug didn't make the game better. It just made lightning resistance a whole lot more important than it needed to be.

 

[Freki]

I wouldn't engage this enemy, just like I wouldn't have engaged an MSLE when that was still dangerous or an FECE with a ranged attack. As long as it's still presumed that I'm going to fight the enemy fairly (which I won't, seeing as the game gives me all of the information I need to know about the enemy before I fight them) I don't see how it can be argued that the game is that much more difficult. If you're saying then the enemy is just going to pop up and kill me instantly, then that's not difficulty, that's Sonic Heroes-style death pits. And that'll send me back to Diablo 2 in a hurry.

What do you want? seriously?

If a pack could kill you you run - if you can't run because they approach to aggressively you go back to d2.

What is your definition of difficult/challenging?

 

[Valnen]

I'm sceptical of this kind of stuff because I don't know what level these characters are, how built they are, or how sane the people controlling them are.

Also, I fully expect the game to NOT be the hard where they're getting killed every 5 minutes for very skilled gamers on Nightmare, but I do suspect it will be hard enough that I'll actually need those health globes.

 

[99%]

Im getting hard waiting for may 15th.

 

[TheYanger]

I'm not arguing that bugs can't make games better (I play Melee). I'm saying that it's silly for them to say that they placed spontaneous death traps in the game on purpose, when gloams are, in fact, very weak if you ignore the fact that Blizzard accidentally added their melee attack to each hit of the lightning.

If I were to formulate a top five of most dangerous things in Diablo 2, the only enemy on the list that isn't dangerous because of a bug is normal difficulty venom lords.

Also, as long as we're discussing it, the burning soul bug didn't make the game better. It just made lightning resistance a whole lot more important than it needed to be.

What I mean is that I think you're confusing intentionally leaving a bug in, vs intentionally placing one in. Nothing was said about them INTENTIONALLY making those mobs there to stop you, but that doesn't mean they didn't notice it when testing the game and go 'huh, good'

 

[elfinke]

I just watched a couple videos of that secret beta area, Fields of Misery. Damn the poison from those trees hits like a truck! One of the vids I was flicking through I saw the hero die in 3 ticks from it.

 

[Freki]

I just watched a couple videos of that secret beta area, Fields of Misery. Damn the poison from those trees hits like a truck! One of the vids I was flicking through I saw the hero die in 3 ticks from it.

Yep - first time i engaged the "Old man" I didn't know what would happen - long story short - I was dead before I could get out of these "spores"...

 

[Fugu]

What do you want? seriously?

If a pack could kill you you run - if you can't run because they approach to aggressively you go back to d2.

What is your definition of difficult/challenging?

I consider a difficult game to be one that requires you to learn spontaneously on a regular basis given information that you already know or can know.

Having said that, I don't particularly want Diablo 3 to be difficult. But if they're going to say things like "you will die", I'd like to know why. I suspected with the number of people describing nightmare and onwards as they did that they had taken the PSO approach to difficulty and made encounters fundamentally more challenging on higher difficulties. It seems that this is not the case. I've said previously in the thread that I've intentionally been avoiding endgame information so my ignorance of the issue isn't a soft spot for me; I only inquired because I had (incorrectly) inferred that a poster in this thread had tried the game on a higher difficulty, and I wanted to know what made it such a big deal.

EDIT: I've decided that this needed a little clarification. I'm going to play hardcore, as I've done for Diablo 2 and as I've effectively done for the original Diablo (the option doesn't exist but I delete my characters when they die). I inquired because I wanted to know if they've made the game basically unplayable without dying by introducing monsters that are both exceptionally dangerous and exceptionally mobile, which would induce artificial difficulty on softcore and would essentially break hardcore.

Also, I fully expect the game to NOT be the hard where they're getting killed every 5 minutes for very skilled gamers on Nightmare, but I do suspect it will be hard enough that I'll actually need those health globes.

That would be great.

What I mean is that I think you're confusing intentionally leaving a bug in, vs intentionally placing one in. Nothing was said about them INTENTIONALLY making those mobs there to stop you, but that doesn't mean they didn't notice it when testing the game and go 'huh, good'

Is there any evidence that they left it in for play balance purposes? Because they half-fixed it in 1.13 and none of the other enemies that shoot lightning (Zakarum priests come to mind) do this. As well, the bug doesn't exist on normal.

 

[FieryBalrog]

I don't know if it was play balance or just oversight, a lot of stuff in D2 was just left in for the players to work out for themselves. Like the Iron Maiden thing, that was definitely not good design and almost certainly left in for years simply out of oversight/neglect.

That said, D3 has an ongoing revenue stream and an incentive to actually take care of shit on Bnet, as opposed to D2 languishing with like 1 guy working on 1.10 for 2 years by himself.

 

[Fugu]

It's honestly a shame, because they could breathe a whole lot of life into the game by fixing a lot of small things.

 

[dLMN8R]

Didn't have a chance to play much of the beta, but what I played simply felt sooooo good...

Happy I got in on the $50 Newegg preorder deal :-D No tax from Newegg here in Seattle (unlike Amazon...)

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

What I find really interesting about a game such as Diablo is how lots of different people can take completely different things away from each character. How I felt completely unempowered and like I was doing something wrong with the Wizard class yet others feel like gods of destruction. How I feel like a spry, tactical death machine with the Demon Hunter yet others feel like a weak fool.

I found the Demon Hunter a tactical dying machine ;D

Witch Doctor however is pretty awesome.

 

[Freki]

I consider a difficult game to be one that requires you to learn spontaneously on a regular basis given information that you already know or can know.

Sorry - but i really have 0 idea what you are talking about. Why do you need to learn on a regular basis if you have all informations?

Having said that, I don't particularly want Diablo 3 to be difficult. But if they're going to say things like "you will die", I'd like to know why. I suspected with the number of people describing nightmare and onwards as they did that they had taken the PSO approach to difficulty and made encounters fundamentally more challenging on higher difficulties.
It seems that this is not the case.

-Special Mobs gain new affixes per difficulty
-Number of affixes grows (n 1, nm 2, hell 3 and inferno 4)
-All mobs get more aggressive
-Size of packs grows
-more hp and damage (but that's to be expected of course)

So i would say this qualifies as "fundamentally more challenging on higher difficulties"

Edit:

EDIT: I've decided that this needed a little clarification. I'm going to play hardcore, as I've done for Diablo 2 and as I've effectively done for the original Diablo (the option doesn't exist but I delete my characters when they die). I inquired because I wanted to know if they've made the game basically unplayable without dying by introducing monsters that are both exceptionally dangerous and exceptionally mobile, which would induce artificial difficulty on softcore and would essentially break hardcore.

From all the interviews I watched and read (a lot believe me) + all blue posts on this topics I gathered the following.

If you play hc you have to be more careful for when you approach higher difficulties as well as farm longer so that your margin of error becomes high enough. There is a point in the game when you outgear everything to a point that you will not die if you are careful (like not fighting several elite packs at once). But this point could require months of "save" farming in lower difficulties. After all difficulty in a game like D3 will always contain some kind of gear check.

 

[Shining Sunshine]

I found the Demon Hunter a tactical dying machine ;D

Witch Doctor however is pretty awesome.

Demon Hunter is a tank, and by that I mean avoidance tank, and by that I mean nothing can touch me, and by that I mean I'm awesome at the game.

Witch Doctor completely blows however.