Anyone else think so?
because you have to complete the game 3 times in a row then do the same thing again just to get good gear.
i think it would be much better if inferno mode replaced hell
I don't think they would even think of changing the "3 difficulty" staple for Diablo 3. It's almost a tradition now, and one that other games even copy. I believe it was conceived as a way to make people see how random their quest could be in D1 and D2, and continue progressing with that same char without having to start a new adventure.
It's the evolution of New Game+ for me.
The 4th difficulty is an evolution of that system. I wouldn't like Inferno replacing Hell, it would break a defined feature of the game, and the way Inferno was presented to us just doesn't fit that.
I don't. The game would go much quicker as the scaling in difficulties is generally what makes leveling much more fun in this particular type of game (Other than finding items and playing with friends). I doubt we could see a similar difficulty curve that Diablo 2 had and many casual players would be angry at not even being able to finish Normal let alone Nightmare without the aid of friends.
I personally love the idea of an extended version of the game that's intended for intense farming and play.
If the whole game is as interesting as the sequence leading up to the skele-king, I have no problems with taking on a new difficulty that functions differently than the previous 3. The random pockets,enjoyable story, and speed of the plot are hard to tire of. I have watch many a stream and while I got tired of many of the players (and poor quality vids) I haven't gotten tired of the questing itself. In fact I was pleasantly surprised when watching probably my 20 something full play-through and caught a new event I hadn't seen before. Is it enough for end game content? not so much, but for an at launch feature I think it fits the bill.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If that made sense to you, Bravo! I think I even confused myself...
Too me, I don't mind 4 difficulties at all. However, I think its just lazy on Blizzards side. Recycling the game rather than adding more content.
If that were the case the ENTIRE point of inferno would be lost. All that lore story and content would almost never be visited save for running through the game once. What do you propose? New content after hell that is only in inferno mode? Will it have story? What about the majority of people who will only play through nightmare, they don't get to see any of it? The system works great.
If I am understanding inferno mode correctly, killing Inferno Diablo will not yield a much improved loot drop than killing say Inferno Act I Boss. If there is no incentive to actually play through Inferno as with the other modes then it makes D3 the same as D2 in regards to the percieved laziness, 3 settings in d2 3 settings in d3 with an extra mode for the nutters like me who will MF this game into the ground
I don't see why hell couldn't fulfil the inferno setting.
For that to happen we would need to reach level 60 at the end of nightmare, or at least Blizzard will have to toss out the idea of finishing all the difficulties (not including Inferno) without reaching the max level.
In the first scenario I just don't see it happening because this moves away from the typical Diablo legacy of having 3 levels of difficulty to complete, and it would mean leveling up would be a little too quick.
In the second, well, there's been a lot of debate about this and Blizzard just won't let it happen for good reason.
Anyone else think so?
because you have to complete the game 3 times in a row then do the same thing again just to get good gear.
i think it would be much better if inferno mode replaced hell
The more dedicated players finish the game countless times anyway, and how is this different the Diablo 2? you would finish the game 2 times, and then start farming mephi/act 5, and you most likely killed baal eventually on your baal run, which means you finished the game 3 times there as well, the only difference is that now you have the chance to play they areas you enjoyed the most in the game with a more challenge and better loot instead having to keep doing boring boss runs.
I actually really like the idea of inferno. And if you are going to add a mode like inferno it needs to be the 4th difficulty not 3rd (and replace Hell).
Normal is for everyone... Particularly the noobs (it will be so easy that they will get to nightmare and will then hopefully be hooked on the game and continue playing)
Nightmare is for the gamers... the ones who will blitz normal and start to have a challenge in NM and towards then end of NM they will start to consider wether to put the game down or not.
Hell is for the Diablo enthusiasts who really like the game but have other things to do and can't dedicate a large portion of their time to it.
Inferno is for you and I... the hardcore Diablo fans that wether we have time for it or not we'll play regardless. It is end game content. There will be no apparent ramping of difficulty it is all for character and item advance.
By inferno the noobs, gamers and even enthusiasts will have put down the game. If you take any of those difficulties away you alienate that difficulty modes demographic. I started playing diablo when I was 10, I want other 10yr olds now to fall in love with the game like I did and be hooked for life.
It sounds like you want the end game to come quicker so you can slide into hardcore diablo gamer boots, which is totally understandable. I want that too... but not at the risk of not having the biggest and best diablo community around capturing the attention ,and keepign it, of everyone for years to come.
While I feel the same content but harder is not what we've come to understand as end game from other blizzard titles people who only played diablo would think this is the greatest thing ever. Now they can clear tons of different areas and have similar results when it comes to item drops, much less boring and tedious than boss runs. Though even for them I wonder (warning spoiler)
how the secret level will play into "endgame" , or not.
Saying anything beyond that is like opening a whole new can of worms for me, so I'll leave it at that.
Too me, I don't mind 4 difficulties at all. However, I think its just lazy on Blizzards side. Recycling the game rather than adding more content.
But, why is 4 lazy but 3 isn't?
Because it felt standard for gaming when both of Diablos were realeased. And now, with capabilities of Blizzard that is MUCH more bigger than it was 10 years ago, it feels like simple milking the players. Because despite items new difficulty is just some number tweaks in mobspawns and mobstats. I wouldn't call this a feature that's supposed to be announced on the conference. You know it took 4 years for Blizz to release second part after Diablo 1, now it's 11 years after and as long as the game feels good so far, it's not gamebreaking at any level.
They have said that boss AI will be alot better in inferno its not just about health and damage .
I think Inferno is a great idea for an endgame, if it works like they say it does. If it actually makes it so you can choose where to farm and get roughly the same results as anywhere else in the game, thats great. But if you're still just able to skip to bosses and kill them quickly and leave, then obviously that will get old fast.
Also, I think it would also work very well if it simply ended up being boss kills as endgame, but you actually had to do the entire dungeon every time. From what it looks like, its much harder to just outrun creatures, so that could very well end up being what happens, and I'd be perfectly fine with that. Especially since you'll run in to different monsters/events every time you go into the dungeon.
Blizzard said they will have monsters (including models) that are unique to each difficulty, so that makes me think that it will not be so "recycled" as it may seem with Nightmare, Hell and Inferno difficulties.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
because you have to complete the game 3 times in a row then do the same thing again just to get good gear.
i think it would be much better if inferno mode replaced hell
Instead of just running certain bosses over and over you have the entire story mode.
It's the evolution of New Game+ for me.
The 4th difficulty is an evolution of that system. I wouldn't like Inferno replacing Hell, it would break a defined feature of the game, and the way Inferno was presented to us just doesn't fit that.
I personally love the idea of an extended version of the game that's intended for intense farming and play.
If that were the case the ENTIRE point of inferno would be lost. All that lore story and content would almost never be visited save for running through the game once. What do you propose? New content after hell that is only in inferno mode? Will it have story? What about the majority of people who will only play through nightmare, they don't get to see any of it? The system works great.
or would require a full party of players
In the first scenario I just don't see it happening because this moves away from the typical Diablo legacy of having 3 levels of difficulty to complete, and it would mean leveling up would be a little too quick.
In the second, well, there's been a lot of debate about this and Blizzard just won't let it happen for good reason.
Nuff said..
The more dedicated players finish the game countless times anyway, and how is this different the Diablo 2? you would finish the game 2 times, and then start farming mephi/act 5, and you most likely killed baal eventually on your baal run, which means you finished the game 3 times there as well, the only difference is that now you have the chance to play they areas you enjoyed the most in the game with a more challenge and better loot instead having to keep doing boring boss runs.
Normal is for everyone... Particularly the noobs (it will be so easy that they will get to nightmare and will then hopefully be hooked on the game and continue playing)
Nightmare is for the gamers... the ones who will blitz normal and start to have a challenge in NM and towards then end of NM they will start to consider wether to put the game down or not.
Hell is for the Diablo enthusiasts who really like the game but have other things to do and can't dedicate a large portion of their time to it.
Inferno is for you and I... the hardcore Diablo fans that wether we have time for it or not we'll play regardless. It is end game content. There will be no apparent ramping of difficulty it is all for character and item advance.
By inferno the noobs, gamers and even enthusiasts will have put down the game. If you take any of those difficulties away you alienate that difficulty modes demographic. I started playing diablo when I was 10, I want other 10yr olds now to fall in love with the game like I did and be hooked for life.
It sounds like you want the end game to come quicker so you can slide into hardcore diablo gamer boots, which is totally understandable. I want that too... but not at the risk of not having the biggest and best diablo community around capturing the attention ,and keepign it, of everyone for years to come.
Everything from the world of Sanctuary
Saying anything beyond that is like opening a whole new can of worms for me, so I'll leave it at that.
They have said that boss AI will be alot better in inferno its not just about health and damage .
With 2 or 3 expansions, the game will be loooooong, and that's good
Also, I think it would also work very well if it simply ended up being boss kills as endgame, but you actually had to do the entire dungeon every time. From what it looks like, its much harder to just outrun creatures, so that could very well end up being what happens, and I'd be perfectly fine with that. Especially since you'll run in to different monsters/events every time you go into the dungeon.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat